[Gen-art] Gen-Art review of draft-ietf-bmwg-dsmterm-12.txt (Informational)

Scott W Brim <swb@employees.org> Thu, 01 June 2006 11:35 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FllSh-0003NV-Ua; Thu, 01 Jun 2006 07:35:35 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FllSh-0003It-1E for gen-art@ietf.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2006 07:35:35 -0400
Received: from willers.employees.org ([192.83.249.36]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FllSf-0006sm-Ng for gen-art@ietf.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2006 07:35:35 -0400
Received: from [10.86.242.113] (bxb-natpool-121.cisco.com [12.159.148.121]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by willers.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 464055CCA0; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 04:35:32 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <447ED102.30901@employees.org>
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 07:35:30 -0400
From: Scott W Brim <swb@employees.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.2) Gecko/20060308 Thunderbird/1.5.0.2 Mnenhy/0.7.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: jperser@veriwave.com, sporetsky@reefpoint.com, shobha@qnetworx.com, sumit@research.telcordia.com, Al Morton <acmorton@att.com>, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, David Kessens <david.kessens@nokia.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 5a9a1bd6c2d06a21d748b7d0070ddcb8
Cc:
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-Art review of draft-ietf-bmwg-dsmterm-12.txt (Informational)
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: gen-art-bounces@ietf.org

Oops, I missed this one.  I hope this late comment is useful in some
way.

Gen-Art front boilerplate:

        I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for
        draft-ietf-bmwg-dsmterm-12.txt.

        For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
        <http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html>.

        Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD
        before posting a new version of the draft.

Review summary: This draft is basically ready but has nits.

Review comments:

In addition to what others have already said, consider

    3.1.1 Classification

    Definition:
      Selection of packets based on the contents of packet header
      according to defined rules.

    Discussion:
      Packets can be selected based on the DS field or IP
      Precedence in the packet header.  Classification can also be
      based on Multi-Field (MF) criteria such as IP Source and
      destination addresses, protocol and port number.

      Classification determines the per-hop behaviors and traffic
      conditioning functions such as shaping and dropping that are
      to be applied to the packet.

The abstract says this draft is about "devices that implement traffic
control based on IP precedence or diff-serv code point criteria." I
see from the above Section 3.1.1 that such devices could use more than
the diffserv field. That's better, but then you limit what can be used
to just the packet header. In fact **classification** can be done on
anything, including what's in the payload, for example whether a
packet is HTTP.  It can even be done on input interface (real and/or
virtual), etc.  What do you think of generalizing the definition to
something simple such as "selection of packets according to defined
rules", and then add another phrase to the first paragraph of the
discussion, for example "or fields in the packet payload".

One more comment:

    3.2.1 Forwarding Capacity

I don't see anywhere where time interval is brought into play -- do
you distinguish between measurements over short versus "long" amounts
of time (burst versus sustained)?

Thanks ... Scott

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art