Re: [conex] "Congestion" vs. "Congestion Volume"

Hi John,

Couple of comments inline --

On Oct 25, 2011, at 4:42 PM, John Leslie wrote:
>> 
>> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-conex-concepts-uses-03.txt
> 
>   This I-D defines "Congestion" and "Congestion Volume". While the
> definitions are mostly right IMHO, there are inevitable problems as
> the terms are used later in the document.
> 
>   Inevitably we must use "level of congestion" in a few places.
> Which does it refer to? I'd argue that it's not always one or the
> other. In some places it's clearly bytes-on-the-wire dropped; in
> others it's clearly percentage of packets dropped. I'd recommend
> that we clarify that "level of congestion" may have different
> meanings in different places along the path.

I think there's a simpler solution -- delete "level of" in all the places it appears. In the definition of congestion we say it _usually_ is expressed as a percentage, therefore if we just use the term "congestion" without "level of" I think it leaves open the possibility of expressing it either way in all of those cases where "level of" is currently used.

> 
>   Also, we use "quotas" in a few places. The implementation of
> quotas, IMHO, is unlikely to be the same everywhere. Some quotas
> will count packets regardless of size; others may count bytes,
> but are likely to count bytes differently: I doubt we can expect
> the count to be bytes-on-the-wire consistently.

This may be true but I don't think this document is the place to discuss it.

> 
>   In IPv6, bytes-on-the-wire can differ considerably from bytes
> of payload, and I would expect some users to argue that they
> shouldn't be charged for anything beyond payload. As an ISP, I
> know "winning" such arguments is Pyrrhic.

Same comment as above.

Thanks,
Alissa

> 
>   (This much should suffice for starting the discussion. ;^)
> 
> --
> John Leslie <john@jlc.net>
> _______________________________________________
> conex mailing list
> conex@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/conex
> 