Re: [aqm] WG status

[Dave Taht <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Scheffenegger, Richard <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> a new month, a new status report.
>
> First of all, Wes and I as chairs would like to thank the editors who have stepped forward to work on the AQM Evaluation Guideline draft. We are really thankful for their burst of efforts in the last couple weeks!
>
> We expect that that a document will be ready for submission into the I-D repository well before cutoff, as an individual draft, so that the WG can see what the state of thinking is currently. Also, once the document is published on datatracker we'd like to encourage active discussion on it.
>
> If the submitted -00 draft is felt to have a fairly complete outline of what the current thinking in the WG is, we may be able to ask the WG for formal adoption during this IETF meeting, or shortly thereafter.
>
>
>
>
>  - WG Milestones:
>    - Submit AQM recommendations to IESG for publication, obsoleting RFC
>  2309 (Goal: January 2014)
>      - draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation is accepted towards this milestone
>      - http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation/
>      - the draft has been updated per comments received
>      - if the authors are comfortable, a WGLC might be made on the next
>  revision
>      - we would like to hear from other authors of RFC 2309 on this
>  document, if anyone has contacts to them.
>
>
>    - Submit AQM algorithm evaluation guidelines to IESG for publication as
>  Informational (Goal: July 2014)
>      - An editor team has come forth and is working on this
>      - A draft should be available for discussion in the London IETF
>      - We encourage discussion on the list and during the meeting, if this
>         draft should be adopted by the working group.
>
>    - Submit first algorithm specification to IESG for publication as
>  Proposed Standard (Goal: December 2014)
>      - Since any Proposed Standard algorithm should be in line with the
>  recommendations and be passable versus the evaluation guidelines, this
>  milestone is dependend on the progress of the two work items above.
>      - Currently the only algorithm spec with a complete and active
>  individual-submission draft is PIE
>
>  - Other items:
>    - draft-pan-aqm-pie is under active work as a proposed algorithm:
>      http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-pan-aqm-pie-00.txt, however the draft
>      has expired and should be refreshed.
>    - draft-nichols-tsvwg-codel is expired; Dave Taht or others may revive it and/or
>  describe pairing with FQ/SFQ algorithms:
>      http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-nichols-tsvwg-codel-01.txt
>    - Other algorithm specifications are welcome!
>      - Though, we are not planning on adopting algorithms until
>  recommendations and evaluation guidelines are mostly stable

We are working on codel, fq_codel, and best current practices documents.

Very, very, very drafty material is being kept in pandoc2rfc format in

https://github.com/dtaht/bufferbloat-rfcs

of these only the home_gateway_queue_management one is even halfway
presentable, and it is anyone's guess as to whether we'll have any of these
complete before ietf.

More eyeballs and help would be nice to have.


>
> Richard Scheffenegger
>
> _______________________________________________
> aqm mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm



-- 
Dave Täht

Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html