Re: [aqm] Who supports tsvwg adoption of adding ECN to L2 or tunnel protocols?

IMO, these guidelines ought to come out in a single recommendation for 
tunnels; we had a draft of that in INTAREA but insufficient momentum.

Piecemeal recommendations are likely to be ignored/lost.

Joe

On 11/4/2013 11:36 PM, Michael Menth wrote:
> +1
>
> We need such guidelines for consistent congestion management.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Michael
>
> Am 05.11.2013 00:16, schrieb Matt Mathis:
>> I think this is valuable work.  Having a single document that
>> describes the requirements and general principles will save future
>> tunnel inventor/implementers from rediscovering the same bugs
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --MM--
>> The best way to predict the future is to create it.  - Alan Kay
>>
>> Privacy matters!  We know from recent events that people are using our
>> services to speak in defiance of unjust governments.   We treat
>> privacy and security as matters of life and death, because for some
>> users, they are.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Bob Briscoe <bob.briscoe@bt.com
>> <mailto:bob.briscoe@bt.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Folks,
>>
>>     Pls respond if you support this being adopted as a work-group item
>>     in the IETF transport services w-g (tsvwg). The WG chairs need
>>     visibility of interest.
>>     Even better, if you're willing to read / comment / review / implement
>>
>>     Guidelines for Adding Congestion Notification to Protocols that
>>     Encapsulate IP
>>     <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-briscoe-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines>
>>
>>     Abstract
>>
>>        The purpose of this document is to guide the design of congestion
>>        notification in any lower layer or tunnelling protocol that
>>        encapsulates IP.  The aim is for explicit congestion signals to
>>        propagate consistently from lower layer protocols into IP.
>>      Then the
>>        IP internetwork layer can act as a portability layer to carry
>>        congestion notification from non-IP-aware congested nodes up to the
>>        transport layer (L4).  Following these guidelines should assure
>>        interworking between new lower layer congestion notification
>>        mechanisms, whether specified by the IETF or other standards
>>     bodies.
>>
>>
>>     [Cross-posting tsvwg & aqm, just in case]
>>
>>
>>     Bob Briscoe,
>>     also for co-authors Pat Thaler and John Kaippallimalil
>>
>>
>>     ________________________________________________________________
>>     Bob Briscoe,    BT
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     aqm mailing list
>>     aqm@ietf.org <mailto:aqm@ietf.org>
>>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aqm mailing list
>> aqm@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
>
> --
> Prof. Dr. habil. Michael Menth
> University of Tuebingen
> Faculty of Science
> Department of Computer Science
> Chair of Communication Networks
> Sand 13, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany
> phone: (+49)-7071/29-70505
> fax: (+49)-7071/29-5220
> mailto:menth@uni-tuebingen.de
> http://kn.inf.uni-tuebingen.de
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aqm mailing list
> aqm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
>