[Diffserv] draft-ietf-diffserv-2836bis-02.txt

Brian E Carpenter <brian@hursley.ibm.com> Wed, 09 May 2001 14:06 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id KAA07353 for <diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 9 May 2001 10:06:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA21156; Wed, 9 May 2001 09:44:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA21130 for <diffserv@ns.ietf.org>; Wed, 9 May 2001 09:44:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from internet-gateway.zurich.ibm.com ([195.212.119.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id JAA06612 for <diffserv@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 May 2001 09:44:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from collon.zurich.ibm.com (collon.zurich.ibm.com [9.4.2.193]) by internet-gateway.zurich.ibm.com (AIX4.3/8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id PAA10912; Wed, 9 May 2001 15:43:38 +0200
Received: from dhcp22-166.zurich.ibm.com by collon.zurich.ibm.com (AIX 4.3/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA28288 from <brian@hursley.ibm.com>; Wed, 9 May 2001 15:43:38 +0200
Message-Id: <3AF948EE.8052C72A@hursley.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 08:41:02 -0500
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian@hursley.ibm.com>
Organization: IBM
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,fr
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: Diff Serv <diffserv@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Diffserv] draft-ietf-diffserv-2836bis-02.txt
Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List <diffserv.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Diffservers,

You will shortly see a new version of RFC2836bis (the PHB Identifier document).
This is because a comment was received during IETF Last Call from one
of the document's own authors - we needed to clarify the meaning of a
PHBID in the case of a PHB Scheduling Class, so a paragraph has been
added.

Since this is a simple clarification, we won't repeat the WG Last Call
process, but there will be a second IETF Last Call to meet the formal
requirements of the standards process.

fyi the added paragraph reads:

   In both cases, when a single PHBID is used to identify a set of PHBs
   (i.e., bit 14 is set to 1), that set of PHBs MUST constitute a PHB
   Scheduling Class (i.e., use of PHBs from the set MUST NOT cause
   intra-microflow traffic reordering when different PHBs from the set
   are applied to traffic in the same microflow).  The set of AF1x PHBs
   [RFC 2597] is an example of a PHB Scheduling Class.  Sets of PHBs
   that do not constitute a PHB Scheduling Class can be identified by
   using more than one PHBID.

Regards
   Brian
   co-author and co-chair

_______________________________________________
diffserv mailing list
diffserv@ietf.org
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv
Archive: http://www2.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html