Re: [Aeon] One question regarding the "Scavenger class"
"Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> Tue, 13 May 2014 16:19 UTC
Return-Path: <paulej@packetizer.com>
X-Original-To: aeon@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: aeon@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A3D31A00B2
for <aeon@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 May 2014 09:19:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.652
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.652 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651,
SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44])
by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id XYLWTbyE5iOe for <aeon@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Tue, 13 May 2014 09:19:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D24281A0087
for <aeon@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 May 2014 09:19:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.20] (cpe-024-211-197-136.nc.res.rr.com
[24.211.197.136]) (authenticated bits=0)
by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s4DGJK6n020966
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
Tue, 13 May 2014 12:19:20 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com;
s=dublin; t=1399997961;
bh=jF66bLi3gMDLnbIabaVq7X/2hAJM0uo9hB6OelNxrRQ=;
h=From:To:Subject:Cc:Date:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:Message-Id:
Mime-Version:Reply-To;
b=OmJXcouTO7PMK2RqfvGk84Sv+zYux9NZ/78iKYk8Pi9iYCioc9LkzgUZH0ihW3r2K
zs8wpkoDMvCexs0oBzmtgER4aotMbKImlAUz9SeSe/KZfiRi8oxJxipgOiZr1R8qEw
ra05RpN+oJnyJsGGAoPrpZ9ctk5zQvkv5ToFGwV0=
From: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
To: "Jose Saldana" <jsaldana@unizar.es>, eckelcu@cisco.com, tireddy@cisco.com
Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 16:19:36 +0000
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------=_MBF522A02F-609D-4F0B-8038-042407F055FD"
In-Reply-To: <00ce01cf6ec5$f0ccccc0$d2666640$@unizar.es>
Message-Id: <em4025d548-0c9f-49ba-b79b-d150e0ae797c@sydney>
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: eM_Client/6.0.20154.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/aeon/grhGr1RRqpr3N-wDM7e0MmqNTi4
Cc: aeon@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Aeon] One question regarding the "Scavenger class"
X-BeenThere: aeon@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
List-Id: "Application Enabled Open Networking \(AEON\)" <aeon.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/aeon>,
<mailto:aeon-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/aeon/>
List-Post: <mailto:aeon@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:aeon-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aeon>,
<mailto:aeon-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 16:19:38 -0000
Yes, it's effectively less-than-best-effort. I think the term originated with http://qos.internet2.edu/wg/wg-documents/qbss-definition.txt. Paul ------ Original Message ------ From: "Jose Saldana" <jsaldana@unizar.es> To: eckelcu@cisco.com; tireddy@cisco.com Cc: aeon@ietf.org Sent: 5/13/2014 12:11:03 PM Subject: [Aeon] One question regarding the "Scavenger class" >Hi, > > > >I have been reading draft-eckel-aeon-use-cases-01, and I was wondering: >is “Scavenger class” the same as “Less than best effort” traffic, as >defined in [1]?: > > > >“The usual definition of the LBE service is the following: in the event >of congestion, all LBE traffic must be discarded before any BE packet >is dropped.” > > > > > >Jose > > > >[1] Y. Hayel, D. Ros and B. Tuffin, “Less-than-Best-Effort Services: >Pricing and Scheduling”, IEEE Proc. of INFOCOM, 2004 >(http://www.irisa.fr/dionysos/pages_perso/tuffin/Publis/scheduling_infocom.pdf) > > > > >
- [Aeon] One question regarding the "Scavenger clas… Jose Saldana
- Re: [Aeon] One question regarding the "Scavenger … Paul E. Jones