Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-rmcat-nada-11
"Xiaoqing Zhu (xiaoqzhu)" <xiaoqzhu@cisco.com> Tue, 13 August 2019 15:26 UTC
Return-Path: <xiaoqzhu@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFAB3120273; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 08:26:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=g+xidjkg; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=D8QoxZLf
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2COZDq4OJxS3; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 08:26:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C5B8120130; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 08:26:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=6894; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1565709984; x=1566919584; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=OKpGM9dAng/XcbXS2+kryDCoPJlZeZSjca4gThisrmI=; b=g+xidjkg9VhusmZ2IqpaoehVq2JDQxBp7+TxbOvrsPSMchyCI+t51qqp 84EEZ9yNAKvFJKUTddLL4dXsjo83hLNONO3m3GTjCHLZO3S1BPJALoxVR HOk5QcWabheEJNtT/zBfZgWYan1PLbeiy7xbxXLdd12NVWyqeaw+0KWmv 0=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:vAe0DB3ZJXBxN6GVsmDT+zVfbzU7u7jyIg8e44YmjLQLaKm44pD+JxKGt+51ggrPWoPWo7JfhuzavrqoeFRI4I3J8RVgOIdJSwdDjMwXmwI6B8vQGUzyK+f4bzESF8VZX1gj9Ha+YgBY
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AnAACL1VJd/5JdJa1mGgEBAQEBAgEBAQEHAgEBAQGBVgIBAQEBCwGBRFADbVUgBAsqhB6DRwOLD4Jbl2KBQoEQA1QJAQEBDAEBJwYCAQGEPwIXgmQjNwYOAQQBAQQBAQQBCm2FJwyFSwIBAQISEREMAQE3AQ8CAQgOBgYCJgICAjAVEAIEAQ0FGweDAAGBagMdAQ6hewKBOIhgc4EygnoBAQWBMgEDAgKDRxiCFAMGgQwoAYtoF4FAP4ERJx+BTn4+gjwlAQEBAoEmg0MygiaMaYIpm1VnCQKCHYZjiVqDdRuCMIcvjl6NVYE2himQJAIEAgQFAg4BAQWBZiKBWHAVOyoBgkGCQoNyhRSFP3IBEIEYjjsBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,381,1559520000"; d="scan'208";a="309379479"
Received: from rcdn-core-10.cisco.com ([173.37.93.146]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 13 Aug 2019 15:26:23 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (xch-aln-004.cisco.com [173.36.7.14]) by rcdn-core-10.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x7DFQNVV002706 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 13 Aug 2019 15:26:23 GMT
Received: from xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) by XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (173.36.7.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 10:26:22 -0500
Received: from xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) by xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 10:26:22 -0500
Received: from NAM04-BN3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 10:26:22 -0500
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=hTSxoi06oBDz4b6fL/pjSbObdrvj9xCPAXmYKKbSPCDYYbCdF8pkrjBayy77vftdi+n5cHa8mqiBDpZ2gMoUbMSIMSYqv2t8r4oeQL9xAw3uIVDuQJEs+KPnHgnPlOxktdpq6Tx8qlliqoEjHZ9xnfFjX4AuBCMevdGIhbe5LmDwXQ46W94p3DQXev+oXzHY90/E8aUsR/MPtM36iK6Rwc7g1uCOOseHcLQW7VOXneed9DcrFsFXR18ntNDOr1eSOhiny4+Kl850PIN8DyWYbYSovZkpANDQDBQVRrZ10PMbJrx0IOHHONPzx2eKU49WWoLmmZ8dk8faBiIW8tzLhg==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=OKpGM9dAng/XcbXS2+kryDCoPJlZeZSjca4gThisrmI=; b=FBRHlHMbgmETkm+Q1cl7iUPYc5/K8C3h1q5sqDz0C5aZHDPEoRbKQF5i3InuW+/xmFEm9gQMInJZuFwK5WjV1DvT0uUeIUcqlVjV50gw4Yg3tW+Ml6Ae0RjFYRxmu3mSsOMQTVS3sXubeqel4kNfdST/xldbXekwwWx3L5zI4qjIh4nd8Sdi4hPEdlixRRfznE2ScHT3AgNMPcRv9/nmcY7xC7SGBUSH91I9agOcM4FPNQ99bOm+afP92AeaxZySTrachUtqhJzRCaUht1jum2/eAWkqZghmFv+qSD49UcfVKNo79CHON0UJKGsBtLV3IySYRwd9srnPfnfIP8Z3Jg==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=OKpGM9dAng/XcbXS2+kryDCoPJlZeZSjca4gThisrmI=; b=D8QoxZLfTx807daKqv2DVngNikLAzeIRu7/P6aUc+6e3UqpkJ94W4IV++2aLIUc4/Dmj6NeY+BumgblhBVbGHxFzU4ava5zvh8YRFf32rPuUVSizYcg4IVs6uTfUgWnK49id4EfNC1jD8ZlgTXGk8cdjW+YKntHUcgxrI6lfNxE=
Received: from CY4PR11MB1559.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.172.72.140) by CY4PR11MB1398.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.169.254.136) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2157.16; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 15:26:21 +0000
Received: from CY4PR11MB1559.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::53:33f3:ea63:7f72]) by CY4PR11MB1559.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::53:33f3:ea63:7f72%3]) with mapi id 15.20.2157.022; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 15:26:21 +0000
From: "Xiaoqing Zhu (xiaoqzhu)" <xiaoqzhu@cisco.com>
To: Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>
CC: "rmcat@ietf.org" <rmcat@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-rmcat-nada.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-rmcat-nada.all@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-rmcat-nada-11
Thread-Index: AQHVS9uLwUJsS2RPN0qBU5Mw1V4jiKb4KBaA
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 15:26:20 +0000
Message-ID: <34AB0964-230B-40F2-A865-08F568E72A85@cisco.com>
References: <156504341913.1947.3933210567772943756@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <156504341913.1947.3933210567772943756@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.1b.0.190715
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=xiaoqzhu@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [2001:420:1402:1250:5f1:23c7:f2d9:d83]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 414c9ae1-0d5f-46d4-4d32-08d72002983a
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:CY4PR11MB1398;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: CY4PR11MB1398:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 4
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <CY4PR11MB139819C4732C0C363E9F4F92C9D20@CY4PR11MB1398.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 01283822F8
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(376002)(39860400002)(366004)(136003)(346002)(396003)(199004)(189003)(6506007)(86362001)(8936002)(6436002)(4326008)(110136005)(76176011)(81166006)(54906003)(102836004)(53936002)(58126008)(6486002)(33656002)(256004)(2906002)(66476007)(64756008)(66556008)(486006)(14454004)(81156014)(2616005)(76116006)(14444005)(2501003)(66946007)(476003)(66446008)(11346002)(446003)(91956017)(478600001)(46003)(186003)(6116002)(305945005)(8676002)(5660300002)(413944005)(6246003)(966005)(6306002)(7736002)(229853002)(6512007)(66574012)(316002)(71190400001)(36756003)(71200400001)(25786009)(99286004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:CY4PR11MB1398; H:CY4PR11MB1559.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: q5WqTqEa1l87GsZvqR22YewSNjywHnPELRHNZyIJRXbNbpoEHa+haQxMAMrZ9scuWOExNE/7A/SIvW4+lpkksU5LVWXnvojZszJaStX4AaXwm9ajzWBfAmSCoIqRCQ55Hpqg3y561tDFG41TRpxxCwSXafQoqklLAYa4rcez4GI56/WjJREpuiBbaWuXG2Gf11Ron8B35UFSXpe1p7Ekqg+0Aef84nZThwGSqEk7dVvqiZ8FbvBFlKWBgvyibgntbMPdU7uVhVcZYVid33LcqtCpDJHxHHoJmgijYe2TR49DwzJZrnyc0Ak30xLLfs7WQM5tDJtJQKPcF9JYMBmGUNlaQgSBzromdWGNpb+ImM/xePxP71uD0s4cRDcgCcWMkK9b9TkXN0X7HIpj3y271DiNWohXMWoWCrxba9oYV20=
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <74D72FC51C00E743B909DE772B045329@namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 414c9ae1-0d5f-46d4-4d32-08d72002983a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 13 Aug 2019 15:26:20.8827 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: KA3xjZdxLniYSsEMgS5t1LMO+TiYTkeQk9IKTIgOz9JKo8KWTnzWUvSYxXAd3xXmM9jXbZInfarexVWEVwyxpA==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY4PR11MB1398
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.14, xch-aln-004.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-10.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/pNnkmNQ6AQx7WWwbQUTkosO2tRw>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-rmcat-nada-11
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 15:26:28 -0000
Dear Joel, Many thanks for your review of this draft. Please find our responses as below, tagged [Authors]. Best, Xiaoqing (on behalf of all authors) On 8/5/19, 5:17 PM, "Joel Halpern via Datatracker" <noreply@ietf.org> wrote: Reviewer: Joel Halpern Review result: Almost Ready I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-rmcat-nada-11 Reviewer: Joel Halpern Review Date: 2019-08-05 IETF LC End Date: 2019-08-12 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: This document is almost ready for publication as an Experimental RFC Major issues: It is unclear reading this RFC how the observation information is to be communicated from the receiver to the sender. At first I thought it was to use the RTP Receiver report. But there is no description of how to map the fields to that report. Then section 5.3 describes requirements for a reporting mechanism, but does not seem to actually define one. Thus, I am left unclear how independent interoperable implementations of this draft can be created. [Authors] Thanks for raising this point. The feedback format is a topic covered by another currently pending draft (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-avtcore-cc-feedback-message-04), which indeed aims at ensuring interoperability of independent implementations of RMCAT congestion control solutions. Therefore, in this draft we only specified what type of information is needed (e.g., receiving rate) and the unit and bit budget it is expressed in (e.g., in bps in 32 bits) in the feedback from the receiver. We also pointed out in Sec. 6.4 that an alternative way to implement this draft would be to leverage feedback messages that contain per-packet information (e.g., delay and loss info) and to move all the calculations from the receiver to the sender. [Author] Given the above considerations, we refrained from specifying a specific feedback format. However, we should perhaps add a reference pointing to the cc-feedback-message draft. Will do that in the next revision. Minor issues: The document has 7 front page authors. The shepherd writeup does not comment on this. The shepherd writeup seems quite sparse. II would have expected some reference to the experimental behavior described in the draft. [Authors] Thanks for raising the concern about long list of front page authors. We got some additional guidance from the AD and will make some adjustments accordingly. [Authors] As for comments on the experimental behavior: we have presented in recent IETF meetings on several sets of real-world evaluations of one implementation of NADA. But, admittedly, the draft is lagging behind in not yet adding pointers to those results. Your suggestion is a great one and we'll add corresponding pointer (see links below) and related discussions in the next version. * https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/103/materials/slides-103-rmcat-nada-implementation-in-mozilla-browser-00 * https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/105/materials/slides-105-rmcat-nada-update-02.pdf This comment is just to confirm that I am reading the draft correctly. It looks like when the observed delay cross the delay boundary, the reporting system reports using a smaller delay than actually approved (slightly more than 1/9th of observed delay when delay is 3*QTH). I presume this is intentional, and that the various analysis pointed to evaluate the risks of such false reporting? [Authors] Yes, your understanding is correct. The main motivation for this "delay warping" In the presence of persistently high queuing delay *and* presence of loss is to help the flow to sustain a more fair rate when competing against aggressive loss-based flows. Will follow your advice and add some discussions on the potential risks involved in performing this "delay warping". Is it intentional in section 4.3 in the pseudo-code that the rate clipping (to keep the rate between RMIN and RMAX) is only applied to the gradual rate change, not to the accelerated rate change? The later code says that the clipping is always applied, which is what I would expect. [Authors] Thanks to the catch. The clipping is always applied. Will fix the text accordingly. Nits/editorial comments: [Authors] Thanks again for your above comments. Our next round of revision (version -12) will incorporate changes as mentioned in our above response.
- [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-r… Joel Halpern via Datatracker
- Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ie… Xiaoqing Zhu (xiaoqzhu)
- Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ie… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [Gen-art] [rmcat] Genart last call review of … Xiaoqing Zhu (xiaoqzhu)
- Re: [Gen-art] [rmcat] Genart last call review of … Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [Gen-art] [rmcat] Genart last call review of … Alissa Cooper