[aqm] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-aqm-eval-guidelines-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

"Benoit Claise" <bclaise@cisco.com> Thu, 19 May 2016 09:38 UTC

Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: aqm@ietf.org
Delivered-To: aqm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DDB612B00E; Thu, 19 May 2016 02:38:24 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.20.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <20160519093824.17314.65212.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2016 02:38:24 -0700
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/aqm/53VRZ8huLZGvOMFyuC6C2NV-FV8>
Cc: al morton <acmorton@att.com>, wes@mti-systems.com, aqm-chairs@ietf.org, linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@huawei.com>, draft-ietf-aqm-eval-guidelines@ietf.org, aqm@ietf.org
Subject: [aqm] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-aqm-eval-guidelines-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: aqm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 19 May 2016 09:38:24 -0000

Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-aqm-eval-guidelines-11: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-aqm-eval-guidelines/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Has a RFC6390 performance directorate review done for the 2.X metrics? It
should.
See http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate/performance-metrics.html
I guess that the metrics will be recorded in the future (See
draft-ietf-ippm-metric-registry-06
), right? 
For example, Flow Completion Time and Packet Loss Synchronization are
new, I believe.
And some other metrics are already documented in RFC6390 compliant
documents. Pointers should be provided.
See
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-independent-burst-gap-discard-01#appendix-A
for an example


----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

- Random Early Detection (RED), BLUE, and Proportional Integral
controller (PI)
Would you have references?

- BDP is mentioned a few times. Please expand.

- Glossary section = terminology section, right? If we want to be
consistent across documents

- section 12.2. Why not a MUST below?
   In order to understand an AQM's deployment considerations and
   performance under a specific environment, AQM proposals SHOULD
   describe the parameters that control the macroscopic AQM behavior,
   and identify any parameters that require tuning to operational
   conditions.