Re: [aqm] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-aqm-fq-codel-05: (with COMMENT)
Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Thu, 17 March 2016 18:10 UTC
Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.com>
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 03DBC12D74B; Thu, 17 Mar 2016 11:10:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 IUoto_Ac98W8; Thu, 17 Mar 2016 11:09:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5253712D536; Thu, 17 Mar 2016 11:09:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=459; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1458238199; x=1459447799; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TB7Y34BbioY6focTaDAhUNPeD5ewv2vncB0oyGwK1U4=; b=IN6eeASu1dulYKDNOJe2ElCirdxozlyc20IyEp4IpxBl5d/tPvakRJ5N DBSi5wfAfO0Illu9u/4odl+94vm6AL+l5QeELuidZ0lu6xC7k/tocg7NU OV6SGHLWD/ekIGljDFhrcSkw8AnEEUFSaz2YTlKQXvYyOkYEzXj6Lhs/0 A=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0ADAgBC8upW/4gNJK1eg0W5N4IPAQ2Bb4YDCgKBOTgUAQEBAQEBAWQnhEIBAQQjFTQMARALGgIFFgsCAgkDAgECAUUGDQgBAYgjsUCPPwEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARh8hSKERIc8gToBBI4viSWOAYFPFodNI4UxjwMeAQFCgjCBVRyLEQEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.24,350,1454976000"; d="scan'208";a="83896604"
Received: from alln-core-3.cisco.com ([173.36.13.136]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 17 Mar 2016 18:09:58 +0000
Received: from [10.24.63.92] ([10.24.63.92]) by alln-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u2HI9upl020251; Thu, 17 Mar 2016 18:09:57 GMT
To: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk>
References: <20160317002541.15492.5207.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <87zitxxc7j.fsf@alrua-desktop.borgediget.toke.dk>
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <56EAF2F4.2090409@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 11:09:56 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <87zitxxc7j.fsf@alrua-desktop.borgediget.toke.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/aqm/wW4VxkbFn1GuAmxA1STeGFL_X_8>
Cc: draft-ietf-aqm-fq-codel@ietf.org, wes@mti-systems.com, j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de, aqm-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, aqm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [aqm] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-aqm-fq-codel-05: (with COMMENT)
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, 17 Mar 2016 18:10:01 -0000
Hi Toke, > >> - section 6 >> While FQ-CoDel has been shown in many scenarios to offer significant >> performance gains, there are some scenarios where the scheduling >> algorithm in particular is not a good fit. >> >> Gains compared to? > I've amended this to read "..offer significant performance gains compared > to alternative queue management strategies.." Which is not that more precise. Anyway, just a comment. Regards, Benoit
- [aqm] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-… Benoit Claise
- Re: [aqm] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-i… Barry Leiba
- Re: [aqm] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-i… Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
- Re: [aqm] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-i… Benoit Claise