[CCAMP] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability-14: (with COMMENT)

Warren Kumari via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Tue, 09 April 2019 23:44 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 657611204A8; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 16:44:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Warren Kumari via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability@ietf.org, Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>, ccamp-chairs@ietf.org, daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com, ccamp@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.95.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Message-ID: <155485344540.19678.965634240652575034.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2019 16:44:05 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/KhEdalykFpeD0rGMePJhR9-ZLFc>
Subject: [CCAMP] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability-14: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ccamp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2019 23:44:06 -0000

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability-14: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I must admit that I'm having a hard time understanding the utility of this, and
how exactly systems are supposed to make a reasonable decision based upon the
information -- I don't **really** care that the probability of the link being
at 100Mbps is 99.995%, what I care about is what the available bandwidth is
*now*. When my device has a 123Mbps flow, it needs to decide what to do with it
-- I get that this document describes how the bandwidth probability can be
transmitted, but how should my device use this information?

I'm also confused by the table:
Sub-bandwidth (Mbps)   Availability
   ------------------     ------------
   200                    99.99%
   100                    99.995%
   100                    99.999%

Is there an error here?

I also support the DISCUSS on the floating-point issue -- perhaps this could be
much more simply encoded with a table and some bits? E.G: 25%, 50%, 75%, 80%,
90%, 91%, 92%.. 99%. If > 99%, then the remaining gets used to encode the
"number of nines" availability (5 == 5 nines).