Ingemar,
This particular response may be best for the ICCRG list and its
research view of things, but would it be possible to accomplish some
of what you want to do directly or indirectly through PlanetLab? I
don't recall the connectivity requirements and layout for PlanetLab,
but to avo
I would agree with Magnus that the TSV Area would be a good place to start with
a more detailed discussion of the topic, although the Transport Area Directors
would be able to provide a more definitive opinion. The one word of caution I
would bring up is that the IETF tends to have a difficult
I, for one, would be very interested to see work done in this area, so count me
as one of the infamous "+1". I think a good place to start is a BCP (or
multiple, depending on what is to be accomplished), and then from that point
consider subsequent related topics. And certainly, we'd want the
Bob,
>>
>> - If any of this is of value, how much belongs in the
>> ICCRG versus TSV working groups?
>
> Well, RED and particularly WRED is very widely deployed. So that implies at
> least guidelines about legacy should be in TSV not ICCRG.
>
> We are really gunning for self-configuring AQMs.
Hola Jose,
could you expand a bit more on your text in the proposed charter regarding
"signaling methods". Are you speaking in the more general context of
information stored in headers of various protocol up and down the stack (ie,
layers 3, 4, and 5/app)? Or, are you speaking of concurrent
> Thanks for your feedback.
>
> Jose
>
>> -Mensaje original-
>> De: tcmtf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:tcmtf-boun...@ietf.org] En nombre de
>> ken carlberg
>> Enviado el: martes, 19 de febrero de 2013 14:17
>> Para: jsald...@unizar.es
>> CC: tc...@ietf.o
a
> good exercise!
>
> Jose
>
>> -Mensaje original-
>> De: tcmtf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:tcmtf-boun...@ietf.org] En nombre de
>> ken carlberg
>> Enviado el: miércoles, 27 de febrero de 2013 16:23
>> Para: jsald...@unizar.es
>> CC: tc...
