Re: [aqm] Who supports tsvwg adoption of adding ECN to L2 or tunnel protocols?

Michael Menth <menth@uni-tuebingen.de> Tue, 05 November 2013 07:36 UTC

Return-Path: <menth@uni-tuebingen.de>
X-Original-To: aqm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: aqm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 192FA21E8087 for <aqm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 23:36:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.021
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.021 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_OBFU_Q1=0.227]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZnqVrf8qRjer for <aqm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 23:36:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx09.uni-tuebingen.de (mx09.uni-tuebingen.de [134.2.3.2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6383721F9D5F for <aqm@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 23:36:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [134.2.11.131] (chaos.Informatik.Uni-Tuebingen.De [134.2.11.131]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx09.uni-tuebingen.de (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id rA57aJgw023898 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <aqm@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 08:36:19 +0100
Message-ID: <52789FF5.3030907@uni-tuebingen.de>
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 08:36:21 +0100
From: Michael Menth <menth@uni-tuebingen.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: aqm@ietf.org
References: <201311042203.rA4M3lo0026458@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk> <CAH56bmDfOxi2FBvg1P-UH-ds_WveZP4NvOyqopKdEcy5WX3XnQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAH56bmDfOxi2FBvg1P-UH-ds_WveZP4NvOyqopKdEcy5WX3XnQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040803080401020203000301"
X-AntiVirus: checked by Avira MailGate (version: 3.2.1.26; AVE: 8.2.12.136; VDF: 7.11.110.236; host: mx09); id=25033-JlXNOw
Subject: Re: [aqm] Who supports tsvwg adoption of adding ECN to L2 or tunnel protocols?
X-BeenThere: aqm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 07:36:32 -0000

+1

We need such guidelines for consistent congestion management.

Best wishes,

Michael

Am 05.11.2013 00:16, schrieb Matt Mathis:
> I think this is valuable work.  Having a single document that
> describes the requirements and general principles will save future
> tunnel inventor/implementers from rediscovering the same bugs
>
> Thanks,
> --MM--
> The best way to predict the future is to create it.  - Alan Kay
>
> Privacy matters!  We know from recent events that people are using our
> services to speak in defiance of unjust governments.   We treat
> privacy and security as matters of life and death, because for some
> users, they are.
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Bob Briscoe <bob.briscoe@bt.com
> <mailto:bob.briscoe@bt.com>> wrote:
>
>     Folks,
>
>     Pls respond if you support this being adopted as a work-group item
>     in the IETF transport services w-g (tsvwg). The WG chairs need
>     visibility of interest.
>     Even better, if you're willing to read / comment / review / implement
>
>     Guidelines for Adding Congestion Notification to Protocols that
>     Encapsulate IP
>     <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-briscoe-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines>
>
>     Abstract
>
>        The purpose of this document is to guide the design of congestion
>        notification in any lower layer or tunnelling protocol that
>        encapsulates IP.  The aim is for explicit congestion signals to
>        propagate consistently from lower layer protocols into IP.
>      Then the
>        IP internetwork layer can act as a portability layer to carry
>        congestion notification from non-IP-aware congested nodes up to the
>        transport layer (L4).  Following these guidelines should assure
>        interworking between new lower layer congestion notification
>        mechanisms, whether specified by the IETF or other standards
>     bodies.
>
>
>     [Cross-posting tsvwg & aqm, just in case]
>
>
>     Bob Briscoe,
>     also for co-authors Pat Thaler and John Kaippallimalil
>
>
>     ________________________________________________________________
>     Bob Briscoe,                                                  BT
>     _______________________________________________
>     aqm mailing list
>     aqm@ietf.org <mailto:aqm@ietf.org>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aqm mailing list
> aqm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm

-- 
Prof. Dr. habil. Michael Menth
University of Tuebingen
Faculty of Science
Department of Computer Science
Chair of Communication Networks
Sand 13, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany
phone: (+49)-7071/29-70505
fax: (+49)-7071/29-5220
mailto:menth@uni-tuebingen.de
http://kn.inf.uni-tuebingen.de