Re: [Dime] Mirja Kühlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-dime-drmp-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Hi Mirja,

On Wed, May 4, 2016, at 04:50 PM, Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) wrote:
> Hi Janet,
> 
> there are clearly more options than the two mention below.
> 
> E.g. one option is the one explained in my initial comment: hhaving two
> queues, that are both served with a certain rate.
> 
> I’m sure there are more (and potentially more complex) solutions to this
> problem as well.
> 
> Assigning an arbitrary priority is not the right option from my point of
> view and can actually hurt the systems.

I hope this will help to clarify things:

One point of assigning default priority is that as this is an extension,
there is a desire to avoid upgrading all clients on the network, as that
would be effectively trying to deploy a new protocol. Consider a network
where proxies and servers understand this extension and none of the
clients do. Then default priority would be assigned to all traffic and
the behaviour of the system is unchanged from the case when the
extension is not deployed. The default priority only makes a difference
if there is a mixture of clients implementing this extension and clients
that don't.

Best Regards,
Alexey

> Mirja
> 
>  
> > Am 04.05.2016 um 17:45 schrieb Gunn, Janet P <Janet.Gunn@csra.com>:
> > 
> > My comment below.
> > Janet
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: DiME [mailto:dime-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 10:31 AM
> > To: Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>
> > Cc: draft-ietf-dime-drmp@ietf.org; dime-chairs@ietf.org; dime@ietf.org; The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Dime] Mirja Kühlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-dime-drmp-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
> > 
> > Hi Alexey,
> > 
> > see below.
> > 
> > The point is, if you explicitly indicate that you have a lower priority, you are okay to be starved. However, if you don’t indicate anything (maybe just because you have not been aware that it is possible to do so), you might have the same or even a higher priority, and in this case it’s not okay to be starved.
> > 
> > Mirja
> > <JPG> If a message comes in without a priority, into a system which serves messages based on priority (regardless of the specific mechanisms)you have two options
> > 1- Discard the message (Not a good idea in most systems)
> > 2 - Assign the message an ARBITRARY priority (we call this arbitrary value the "default priority")
> > 
> > You can (and probably will) argue 'til the cows come home on what that arbitrary/default value SHOULD BE.  And different sytems/applications might have different "default values".
> > 
> > But I don't think there should be any argument that, if a message comes in without a priority, you need to assign it a priority.
> > 
> > </JPG>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > DiME mailing list
> > DiME@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime
> > 
> > This electronic message transmission contains information from CSRA that may be attorney-client privileged, proprietary or confidential. The information in this message is intended only for use by the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. If you believe you have received this message in error, please contact me immediately and be aware that any use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. NOTE: Regardless of content, this email shall not operate to bind CSRA to any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written agreement or government initiative expressly permitting the use of email for such purpose.
> 