Re: [AVTCORE] Mirja Kühlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers-15: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Magnus Westerlund <[e-mail]>]

Mirja and Colin,

We need to make progress on resolving this Discuss.

To my understanding where we stand are that Mirja thinks that Circuit 
breaker should not state that ECN CE marks should not result in the same 
response as a packet loss provides. Colin disagree and base that on the 
current in force Standards Track document (RFC3168).

 From my view, I do understand Mirja's view that this is likely not 
where we want to be in the future when it comes to response to ECN CE 
marks. However, at the same time, there is not yet a even a WG item for 
addressing this and changing the current ECN specification. There 
doesn't yet exist even a WG consensus on what the desired response to 
ECN CE marks are. Blocking the publication of the document for 
referencing what it the current in force specification is not a 
reasonable discuss in this case.

The suggestion that there should be another specified behaviour for ECN 
CE marks for the algorithm in circuit breakers is hard to perform 
without a IETF consensus for what the desired response to ECN CE marks is.

I also note that if circuit breakers would like to define another 
behaviour to ECN-CE marks, it would need to update the existing MUST in 
ECN specification. We can't simply ignore the MUST in RFC3168 simply 
because it doesn't suit us. Thus requiring the circuit breaker document 
to achieve the IETF consensus on the ECN change. This may very likely 
cause a minimal 1 year delay, more likely 2 years before we have an IETF 
consensus on this question. This for a document that is already have a 
significant missref queue behind it.

What I think is reasonable is to pave the way as good as possible for 
the future change. Do a much by reference to the current in force 
specification. But, I fear that we will not be able to avoid doing an 
update on circuit breaker when the new ECN-CE behaviour has been agreed.

Does this sound like a reasonable way forward?


Cheers

Magnus Westerlund
AVTCORE WG chair and document shepherd.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Services, Media and Network features, Ericsson Research EAB/TXM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                 | Phone  [phone]
Färögatan 6                 | Mobile [phone]
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [e-mail]
----------------------------------------------------------------------