> On 7 Jul, 2016, at 15:34, Michael Menth wrote:
>
>> Based on our evaluations, with pure CoDel (without FQ-CoDel),
>> "reentering" is actually a common case. I think Dave and Toke should
>> have more experimental results to answer this question. (I included
>> Dave in CC)
>
> We also studied
Wes,
If the 'algorithm' drafts (CoDel, FQ-CoDel, and PIE) are targeted as
Experimental, does that mean at some time later their status moves onto either
PS (if real-world testing & use pans out) or Informational (if no activity
further proves it out but the authors want to keep the info out the
Wes and all,
My comment is in regard to Polina's comment "The WG currently has two AQMs
(dropping/marking policy) in last call. Did someone evaluate these AQMs
according to the specified guidelines?". As I read over
draft-ietf-aqm-eval-guidelines, I did not think the objective of this memo was