Re: [conex] Accounting of ConEx signals

Hi John,

I tend to agree with you - on average, there will be little difference
between counting packets, or counting bytes;

However, if we don't agree on what is the "correct" approach beforehand
and any box is free to account whatever, this may lead to exploits. On
another example, if my ISP charges for the congestion volume, it is not
irrelevant how this accounting is performed. And as soon as money is
involved, this is a high incentive to cheat...

IMHO, congestion volume (as defined) is measured in bytes, not packets;
and as Conex is a IP-layer mechanism, the natural unit would be full IP
packets (IP header + payload), which happens to be readily available by
examining the header (although not as quick as simply accounting
packets).

For the sender transmitting variable sized packets, this may lead to a
different number of conex marked packets (but more accurate
byte-congestion volume), or vice versa.

Richard Scheffenegger

> 
>    For most purposes, I think just counting the marks will suffice;
> but clearly we shouldn't prohibit experiments counting something else.
> 
> --
> John Leslie <john@jlc.net>
> _______________________________________________
> conex mailing list
> conex@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/conex