Re: [aqm] Last Call: <draft-ietf-aqm-fq-codel-05.txt> (FlowQueue-Codel) to Experimental RFC

Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> Thu, 24 March 2016 10:56 UTC

Return-Path: <dave@cridland.net>
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 3301E12D599 for <aqm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Mar 2016 03:56:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cridland.net
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 DOklD8b6wBpZ for <aqm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Mar 2016 03:56:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22e.google.com (mail-wm0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 583DC12D65B for <aqm@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Mar 2016 03:56:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id p65so60067200wmp.0 for <aqm@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Mar 2016 03:56:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cridland.net; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=YSo8ef/1SER4NlWmBvaNVM46YYOkwBRzctYxAN4DpwQ=; b=dy1DxdT2mLjNg7Jw2ME9xMLjRXJ2QRjRw5gyY001MLugBrRPcWkpTsmJVrKh3h+S3T F6B/1h5cAv26gGp7nuqI6bmKvEXYXEPqHE2BCrcaW4d+rdyPZClomVY9ZtEI0T3bXwFT rAtS1ULGzgGbDDgdiGWgFCz69FZGoUGW7uq9w=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=YSo8ef/1SER4NlWmBvaNVM46YYOkwBRzctYxAN4DpwQ=; b=QEduBShYSYA8db2TfYuLplyf8Vors6OXaXZnDz6/VAZZeEdSLW/eeapJ5WmjMI0xxA pnUiFcNOFAh0KuMiErVtFKMhotDw/E0HPgdW8/zJ3QjJPhb+PCur/79q0uMKir1mf7pY iAkMQ4DzsOA/uOGQuMM01D22GD8fiYH4w8HrpYj0PcGHuJ+VJFZ/kFZgk9491prbZXSe gSCwBHRJhH1sy/yfetcTHgJyAhMe+T8XfawpY1s5wBB86AfechWjAWrfwRdw+79zqq3J 91+wv2ZsOXtdpgiL9EbbCUmfsCFstC/FzTvK1UJ5rX13qJFdwEajUybXV1wslbxNS3Sf UZjQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJLxtIUR1UZxxQo8DgAcOWDiq7d0mOXj7MKzTMcMISsAk/TMX/wPE+fQSM5Jl/wGOzoAAd1nhfyEstv8bsAm
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.28.227.69 with SMTP id a66mr31198212wmh.57.1458816975888; Thu, 24 Mar 2016 03:56:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.28.37.199 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Mar 2016 03:56:15 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <87twjwb1zs.fsf@toke.dk>
References: <20160303172022.12971.79276.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <56EBDA04.3020500@bobbriscoe.net> <56F3587D.5070000@swin.edu.au> <CAKHUCzz=9zORizo2qp6-hLrd-S2zm_aVaLPhH60HZLKQDEOfvQ@mail.gmail.com> <87twjwb1zs.fsf@toke.dk>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 10:56:15 +0000
Message-ID: <CAKHUCzzoGYUOQiQ4nsiWhTV9JooRNCcSwErhss5ajG0C-tYLFg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
To: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114b1584a40306052ec94bb3"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/aqm/KfOiZMpbjW60bTDvNz0D_Pu76lM>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 06:40:58 -0700
Cc: draft-ietf-aqm-fq-codel@ietf.org, Bob Briscoe <research@bobbriscoe.net>, grenville armitage <garmitage@swin.edu.au>, aqm-chairs@ietf.org, mls.ietf@gmail.com, aqm@ietf.org, "ietf@ietf.org Discussion" <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [aqm] Last Call: <draft-ietf-aqm-fq-codel-05.txt> (FlowQueue-Codel) to Experimental RFC
X-BeenThere: aqm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <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, 24 Mar 2016 10:56:20 -0000

On 24 March 2016 at 10:32, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk> wrote:

> Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> writes:
>
> > Actually I'd read that as more of a recommendation than merely safe. I
> > think by safe, the authors mean that no significant harm has been
> > found to occur.
>
> What we meant to say was something along the lines of "You want to turn
> this on; it'll do you good, so get on with it! You won't regret it! Now
> go fix the next 100 million devices!". The current formulation in the
> draft is an attempt to be slightly less colloquial about it... ;)
>

Well, I have to ask why, in this case, it's Experimental and not
Standards-Track?

Please try to explain as if I haven't read your draft and wouldn't
understand it if I did, but you seem to be saying this is an applicability
statement indicating you want wide deployment, but, from RFC 2026:

   (d)  Limited Use:  The TS is considered to be appropriate for use
      only in limited or unique circumstances.  For example, the usage
      of a protocol with the "Experimental" designation should generally
      be limited to those actively involved with the experiment.


If what you're saying is that you do believe this is "ready" for wide
deployment, you should be publishing on the Standards Track, surely?

Dave.