Re: [aqm] [tsvwg] New Liaison Statement, "Explicit Congestion Notification for Lower Layer Protocols"

Somehow the wrong old name seems to stick with this draft. I can understand that, I'm used to it: it's just normal that people want to use your name all the time when you're an exceptionally good-looking celebrity.
So of course draft-welzl-... is sexier than draft-ietf-aqm-.... but we just have to face the truth:
the correct name of this draft is (and has long been) draft-ietf-aqm-ecn-benefits

(this wrongly appears in at least two positions in the text below)

Cheers,
Michael

> On 21. jul. 2015, at 21.02, Scheffenegger, Richard <rs@netapp.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> Title: Explicit Congestion Notification for Lower Layer Protocols
>> Submission Date: 2015-07-20
>> URL of the IETF Web page: https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1424/
>> Please reply by 2015-10-30
>> From: Transport Area Working Group (David Black <david.black@emc.com>)
>> To: 3GPP (Susanna.Kooistra@etsi.org)
>> Cc: Gonzalo Camarillo <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com>,Gorry Fairhurst
>> <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>,Martin Stiemerling <mls.ietf@gmail.com>,Spencer
>> Dawkins <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>,John Kaippallimalil
>> <John.Kaippallimalil@huawei.com>,Bob Briscoe
>> <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>,Transport Area Working Group Discussion List
>> <tsvwg@ietf.org>
>> Response Contact: David Black <david.black@emc.com>
>> Technical Contact: Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>
>> Purpose: For comment
>> 
>> Body: To: 3GPP SA, 3GPP CT, 3GPP RAN, 3GPP SA4, 3GPP SA2, 3GPP RAN2
>> From: IETF TSVWG
>> 
>> In 2001, the IETF introduced explicit congestion notification (ECN) to the
>> Internet Protocol as a proposed standard [RFC3168]. The purpose of ECN was
>> to notify congestion without having to drop packets. The IETF originally
>> specified ECN for cases where buffers were IP-aware. However, ECN is now
>> being used in a number of environments including codec selection and rate
>> adaptation, where 3GPP protocols such as PDCP encapsulate IP. As active
>> queue management (AQM) and ECN become widely deployed in 3GPP networks and
>> interconnected IP networks, it could be incompatible with the standardized
>> use of ECN across the end-to-end IP transport [RFC7567].
>> 
>> The IETF is now considering new uses of ECN for low latency [draft-welzl-
>> ecn-benefits] that would be applicable to 5G mobile flows. However, the
>> IETF has realized that it has given little if any guidance on how to add
>> explicit congestion notification to lower layer protocols or interfaces
>> between lower layers and ECN in IP.
>> 
>> This liaison statement is to inform 3GPP, in particular those groups
>> including those involved in 3GPP Release-10 work on the work item ECSRA_LA
>> (TR23.860) - SA4, CT4, SA2 and RAN2. Please distribute to all groups that
>> have used or plan to use IETF ECN /AQM RFCs in 3GPP specifications.
>> 
>> The IETF has started work on guidelines for adding ECN to protocols that
>> may encapsulate IP and interfacing these protocols with ECN in IP. Then IP
>> may act in its role as an interoperability protocol over multiple
>> forwarding protocols. This activity is led by the IETF's transport
>> services working group (tsvwg).
>> 
>> Actions:
>> The IETF tsvwg kindly asks 3GPP:
>> 1) to tell the IETF tsvwg which 3GPP working groups could be affected by
>> this work.
>> 2) To inform the IETF tsvwg of any specific 3GPP specifications affected
>> by this work.
>> 3) to forward this liaison statement to these affected working groups, and
>> to invite them to review the latest draft of the guidelines, available
>> here:
>>         < http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-
>> guidelines>
>> 
>> Review comments are particularly welcome on:
>>  - comprehensibility for the 3GPP community
>>  - usefulness and applicability
>>  - technical feasibility
>> 
>> Review comments may be posted directly to the IETF tsvwg mailing list
>> <mailto: tsvwg@ietf.org>. Postings from non-subscribers may be delayed by
>> moderation. Alternatively, subscription is open to all at: <
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>.
>> 
>> The following IETF specifications or drafts are particularly relevant to
>> this activity (the relevance of each of them is explained in the first
>> item below):
>> * draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines
>> * RFC3168 updated by RFC4301, RFC6040 (ECN in respectively: IP/TCP, IPsec
>> & IP-in-IP tunnels)
>> * RFC6679 (ECN in RTP)
>> * RFC5129 updated by RFC5462 (ECN in MPLS)
>> * RFC4774 (Specifying alternative semantics for the ECN field)
>> * RFC7567 (Recommendations Regarding Active Queue Management
>> * draft-welzl-ecn-benefits (Benefits to Applications of Using ECN)
>> 
>> Yours,
>> --David L. Black (TSVWG co-chair)
>> Attachments:
>> 
>> No document has been attached
> 
> _______________________________________________
> aqm mailing list
> aqm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm