Re: [aqm] aqm conference call results?

[Nicolas KUHN <[e-mail]>]

Dear Dave, 

On Jun 26, 2014, at 7:29 PM, Dave Taht <[e-mail]> wrote:

> there some slides presented that I'd like to refer to as to the aqm
> evaluation guide's directions that I'd like to see again. Link?
> 

I attached them to this email. 

> As it is being broken up into an overview and a second document
> detailing tests, I'd like people to look over the tests proposed in
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sarker-rmcat-eval-test-01
> 
> as a possible inspiration.

AFAIK, in the RMCAT group, there are two working documents
[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-criteria-01
[2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sarker-rmcat-eval-test-01

I think that what we had written ( in evaluation-guidelines-00 ) tried to be close to both [1] and [2]. Our idea was then to split our original document in two and produce an equivalent to [1] in the update version ( evaluation-guidelines-01 ). This document  would focus on AQM related issues and explains what aspects must be assessed, before diving into specific tests details such as it is done in [2]. 

Regards, 

Nicolas 

> While I like the above a lot, it bothers me
> that it is only targeted at very low bandwidth scenarios (4mbit being
> the topmost).
> 
> There are hopefully other tests proposed by other relevant working
> groups (ippm, http 2.0, sctp come to mind immediately), that I'd like
> to be aware of, and yet don't have the energy to sort through each wg
> to find. If there is a way to get a list of tests each wg considers
> important to work with, that would be a starting point.
> 


> 
> -- 
> Dave Täht
> 
> _______________________________________________
> aqm mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm