Re: [aqm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-aqm-ecn-benefits-04.txt

Mirja Kühlewind <mirja.kuehlewind@tik.ee.ethz.ch> Thu, 18 June 2015 13:50 UTC

Return-Path: <mirja.kuehlewind@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
X-Original-To: aqm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: aqm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA0211B31D2 for <aqm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 06:50:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 GBBNiY2myWKw for <aqm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 06:50:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.ee.ethz.ch (smtp.ee.ethz.ch [129.132.2.219]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9DEE1B31D3 for <aqm@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 06:50:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.ee.ethz.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D8FBD930B; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 15:50:42 +0200 (MEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new on smtp.ee.ethz.ch
Received: from smtp.ee.ethz.ch ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.ee.ethz.ch [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id ABByYdaYZdMh; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 15:50:42 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from [192.168.178.33] (x5f700897.dyn.telefonica.de [95.112.8.151]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mirjak) by smtp.ee.ethz.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 19D41D9309; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 15:50:42 +0200 (MEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\))
From: Mirja Kühlewind <mirja.kuehlewind@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
In-Reply-To: <557AFABE.9030105@mti-systems.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 15:50:41 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3E275CBF-452B-493F-8473-6BDFD8C5F477@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
References: <20150505184955.17501.42937.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5578555C.9040907@tik.ee.ethz.ch> <f589865402b049f8a42dd63e7dc11287.squirrel@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <1BA8826B-9EF6-4028-842A-7218B74D70D1@tik.ee.ethz.ch> <72b52beda2b04a01034482b71b4c4869.squirrel@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <557AFABE.9030105@mti-systems.com>
To: Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/aqm/3xwCHP-87zrV-XD71UbOKyg3PgE>
Cc: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk, aqm@ietf.org, Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
Subject: Re: [aqm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-aqm-ecn-benefits-04.txt
X-BeenThere: aqm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for active queue management and flow isolation." <aqm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/aqm>, <mailto:aqm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/aqm/>
List-Post: <mailto:aqm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:aqm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm>, <mailto:aqm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 13:50:46 -0000

Hi Wes,

the concern I have is that, even if no normative language is used (which is correct), people might still take this as a IETF recommendation and therefore I think we should review it carefully. However, as no normative language is used, people might not review this document sufficiently… Definitely good to mention this to the IESG explicitly!

Mirja


> Am 12.06.2015 um 17:29 schrieb Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>:
> 
> On 6/12/2015 8:46 AM, gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk wrote:
>> Since we are already in WGLC, the WG Chairs probably will need to decide
>> the scope - if this is changed, I expect will anyway require a new WGLC. 
>> Hopefully the new ID will help.
> 
> 
> Here are my thoughts, with chair hat on.
> 
> It's an Informational document (i.e. not Standards Track or BCP).  It
> does have some advice about how not to break ECN, but it's not
> altering or changing any previous standards or BCPs about how devices,
> hosts, or applications behave.
> 
> I think it correctly avoids using the 2119 capitalized words (SHOULD,
> MUST, etc.).  There are some non-capitalized "must" and "should" words
> in section 5 when going through the high-level list of prerequisites
> for successful use of ECN, and in my opinion, this is one of the more
> useful parts of the document to summarize and bring the advice together.
> 
> There's definitely a valid criticism that it isn't particularly
> specific about some details in this guidance, but I think that's
> probably desirable, as some are still being worked out, and would
> ultimately go into Standards Track and BCP documents from TSVWG or
> some other working group.
> 
> I think as the AQM working group, the level of detail and strength
> of recommendations made in -04 are pretty much on the mark for what
> we should say.
> 
> Certainly people should let us know during this Last Call if they
> feel otherwise.  It can be something we explicitly ask the AD to
> confirm during their review too.
> 
> -- 
> Wes Eddy
> MTI Systems