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

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Thu, 11 April 2019 13:12 UTC

Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA347120230 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 06:12:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.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 KJlk0dJ_Hw4d for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 06:12:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x730.google.com (mail-qk1-x730.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::730]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EAB4012004F for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 06:12:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x730.google.com with SMTP id a71so3396636qkg.2 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 06:12:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=PUeG0vt8vsrsGTvzrxkSjrLzOOi6pVOSR8q2x0Kw+Us=; b=H1JLhRlnLjVQP/pY98Uq4QLs8vTT8axCFk+nTIdJpycxZjK6kv2BzUdB8qW5s7/GT4 /k2yxc9JaKGV0zV+PSP02mPLQMq97LORG8NcPvV9GQw2U0nOZ8sLMWaiYBXERnNb4XOE zbQU6S/aLYdiyM4OzQCmJxqeRJH/gxX/PD+3oxJB+pk+Uo3x+uRBVmwZ1qt2Y7zyL9rZ GzQCrpM/n/PJfnjWLbnAkjvZfy2CSV3DWRLB5T9rErO+qA+7fFZg0upotKREk5kZNdKJ JO0aRON/CmYXces7U8Vju0UjZtaQhzElRZOSucU8VVfIBkpbKi4l768r0lVbd05aeoeQ yviQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PUeG0vt8vsrsGTvzrxkSjrLzOOi6pVOSR8q2x0Kw+Us=; b=ukMbxSkg/RvfhQMPVRR1KcAxk4/M7E8BGrCsmqlhrDPLVG6v2/XGNKpG/q38zCUr2k G5BqkYDLmmbVhR3apxHdODfDASolcpQNAwP05O81yxkWsw50XjGYBhsTXplzQ/L6NSfV 0on+GN9C74awSe0Q81cyZeYhthtYln9RI0McTzqyTXLjr3FISXsiYe3JkG/878Raj3nd CBDP9g55mR0TfPYedY34w5r5lb//v+27GicskxG+9Vws0sE8l/5NldwOzxUBCeimKMEe mvNZITzodaHFc5Ln77MvSibNdLCyWzWJxXC47cBLKwnALuTxDzP0BJTHm4YsHvNx/pXM VR6g==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUTcsOiGJuMBdnqd9QdJ4xGdlgAJOh4OqTAAhE/aRUGIuNs9Cmo WmAIjMemsxRsrelME7Fph7/iq2WfuARjDMJxRTNMGQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyfc6boIXbgMEyoGQ3Hhk5lnFDmri+TSdJ7588DaSSdGMT8OO13Vg3oQLnyQSfAmTyDZr5GflwrPqzxepynSR0=
X-Received: by 2002:a37:a650:: with SMTP id p77mr38688954qke.256.1554988328122; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 06:12:08 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <155485344540.19678.965634240652575034.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <9C5FD3EFA72E1740A3D41BADDE0B461FCFBDC1BD@DGGEMM528-MBX.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <9C5FD3EFA72E1740A3D41BADDE0B461FCFBDC1BD@DGGEMM528-MBX.china.huawei.com>
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 09:11:31 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHw9_iLs8QoMpQeW-OuwN8xeNLwnnGyYU2AZJhgqR8-BOrMWfA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Yemin (Amy)" <amy.yemin@huawei.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability@ietf.org>, Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>, "ccamp-chairs@ietf.org" <ccamp-chairs@ietf.org>, "ccamp@ietf.org" <ccamp@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ed9108058640eee6"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/grvY26Pdcqfqe87FnAV14ZTGfqY>
Subject: Re: [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
Precedence: list
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: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 13:12:13 -0000

On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 8:27 AM Yemin (Amy) <amy.yemin@huawei.com>; wrote:

> Hi Warren,
>
> Thanks for the comments, please see reply inline below.
>
> BR,
> Amy
> ________________________________________
> 发件人: Warren Kumari via Datatracker [noreply@ietf.org]
> 发送时间: 2019年4月10日 7:44
> 收件人: The IESG
> 抄送: draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability@ietf.org; Daniele
> Ceccarelli; ccamp-chairs@ietf.org; daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com;
> ccamp@ietf.org
> 主题: Warren Kumari's No Objection on
> draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability-14: (with COMMENT)
>
> 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?
> [Amy] The OSPF extension RFC8330 defines how the information is
> distributed by OSPF.
> This draft defines the signaling, how much bandwidth and corresponding
> availability level a flow would like to have.
>
> 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?
> [Amy] The table will be modified as following:
>    400                    99.99%
>    200                    99.995%
>    100                    99.999%
>
>
Cool, thanks.



> 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).
> [Amy] Since the OSPF extension RFC8330 use the floating-point number, here
> we would like to continue using it.
>

Ah, ok, fair enough.

Thanks,
W



> Reference to IEEE754 will be added.
>



-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in
the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of
pants.
   ---maf