Re: [aqm] WGLC on draft-ietf-aqm-eval-guidelines

["LAUTENSCHLAEGER, Wolfram (Wolfram)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi all,

I read the latest version of the draft, and I found it useful. The draft
addresses a comprehensive range of topics for AQM characterization. What I
am not so happy with, is the description of the corresponding experiments.
Some critical points of my first review
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/aqm/OwPTGmXLpEmCChpgE7ZFqFnnT64 still
persist. I would like to regard these experiments as initial proposals
(which is good to have) that might undergo substantial revision in practice
later on. In general I have the feeling that the combinatorial number of
mandatory experiments is close to infinity. Not only that I doubt this will
ever be done; but who is subsequently going to judge the huge amount of
results?

Here are some minor comments:

Section 2.7 defines goodput/delay scatter plots in two different ways: On
with reference to [HAYE2013], the other definition with reference to
[WINS2014]. I would prefer to have only one definition, namely [WINS2014]. 
- [HAYE2013] depends on a parameter variation across certain range (e.g.
traffic load, or buffer size) that is not defined in most of our
experiments.
- [WINS2014] depends only on randomized replication of otherwise identical
experiments. This should be applicable to any of the evaluation experiments.
(In fact, it is unavoidable anyway.)

Section 4.3: The term "long-lived non application-limited UDP" is somewhat
infinite bandwidth. What the authors probably mean is "long-lived UDP flow
from unresponsive application" to make it clear that no application layer
congestion control is present like in NFS.

Section 2.1: Formula on flow completion time: mismatch of dimensions (Byte
vs. Mbps)



Wolfram Lautenschlaeger



-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: aqm [mailto:[e-mail]] Im Auftrag von Wesley Eddy
Gesendet: Montag, 10. August 2015 15:44
An: [e-mail]
Betreff: [aqm] WGLC on draft-ietf-aqm-eval-guidelines

As chairs, Richard and I would like to start a 2-week working group last
call on the AQM characterization guidelines:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-aqm-eval-guidelines/

Please make a review of this, and send comments to the list or chairs.  Any
comments that you might have will be useful to us, even if it's just to say
that you've read it and have no other comments.

Thanks!

--
Wes Eddy
MTI Systems

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