Re: [aqm] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-aqm-pie-07: (with COMMENT)

["Ben Campbell" <[e-mail]>]

On 19 May 2016, at 10:47, Mirja Kühlewind wrote:

> Hi Ben,
>
> just quickly on one point blow.
>
> On 19.05.2016 03:10, Ben Campbell wrote:
>> Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
>> draft-ietf-aqm-pie-07: No Objection
>>
>> 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-pie/
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> In section 5 and its children: Please keep in mind that "SHOULD" does 
>> not
>> mean quite the same thing as "optional".
>
> (Will also check this with the authors)

Okay.

>
>>
>> It would be nice to see some text about the nature of the 
>> "experiment".
>> That is, why is this experimental? Do you expect to promote this to a
>> standard in the future? (The shepherd's report speaks of this;  the 
>> draft
>> should, too.)
>
> Yes, I already recommend based on the feedback from the OPS-DIR review 
> to add a section about the nature/goals of the experiment.
>
> AQM will have a recharter discussion at the next meeting which might 
> lead to rechartering or closure. If the wg will continue, moving this 
> doc forward might be one of their work items. Otherwise there are 
> currently no plans. Even though there are implementations of PIE in 
> the wild, the working did not have consensus to publish this doc as ST 
> now, as these implementation are currently mostly used in home devices 
> and not the Internet itself.

Thanks. I did not mean to ask for specific plans to promote the document 
later; it's a more a matter of whether people think this might happen 
someday, depending on the results of the "experiment" :-)

Ben.