Re: [aqm] draft-white-aqm-docsis-pie [was: working group status]

Hi,

in the spirit of documenting what is deployed in the network today, I want to thank Greg and Rong for writing up what DOCSIS is shipping, and I think that it should be published as Informational.

Having it go via the WG has IMO the advantage that the wording will get more review, and so the explanation of what DOCSIS is doing may end up being more clear. (The WG obviously can't really ask for technical changes, since this is merely documenting what DOCSIS has already decided to do.)

Lars

On 2015-1-16, at 01:17, Greg White <g.white@cablelabs.com> wrote:
> 
> Wes, all,
> 
> This draft was written in response to a request from members of the AQM
> WG. IIRC there was a general interest in the IETF being kept informed of
> AQM algorithms that are being used in L2 standards, and a specific request
> to me that CableLabs write up the technology selected for DOCSIS with the
> intent (I believe) that it be published as an Informational RFC.  I'm
> perfectly happy for this to become a working group document, and it seems
> appropriate to me. But, if not, I will commit to seeing it through the ISE
> process.
> 
> -Greg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 1/13/15, 6:09 AM, "Wesley Eddy" <wes@mti-systems.com> wrote:
> 
>>     - http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-white-aqm-docsis-pie/
>>       - This could be put forward for Informational along with the PIE
>>         algorithm spec.  If the working group commits to it, it could
>>         come from the AQM WG, or it could be an ISE track document
>>         otherwise.  ***We'd like to hear from the AQM working group on
>>         whether to adopt it for Informational.***
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> aqm mailing list
> aqm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm

Re: [aqm] draft-white-aqm-docsis-pie [was: working group status]

Attachment: signature.asc