Re: [iccrg] Adoption of rLEDBAT and LEDBAT++

Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no> Tue, 11 February 2020 12:32 UTC

Return-Path: <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
X-Original-To: iccrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iccrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21C2412011C for <iccrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 04:32:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 2yonqL5Nmr9R for <iccrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 04:32:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-out01.uio.no (mail-out01.uio.no [IPv6:2001:700:100:10::50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 29E811200E5 for <iccrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 04:32:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-mx12.uio.no ([129.240.10.84]) by mail-out01.uio.no with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93.0.4) (envelope-from <michawe@ifi.uio.no>) id 1j1UiV-0000gt-FK; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 13:32:39 +0100
Received: from boomerang.ifi.uio.no ([129.240.68.135]) by mail-mx12.uio.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) user michawe (Exim 4.93.0.4) (envelope-from <michawe@ifi.uio.no>) id 1j1UiU-000Blp-Qs; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 13:32:39 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
In-Reply-To: <CACpbDccBj3JKjPLjehgMcR=c5GybL=tF5BaV8k2Z-QGJtjUhJg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 13:32:37 +0100
Cc: iccrg IRTF list <iccrg@irtf.org>, MARCELO GABRIEL BAGNULO BRAUN <marcelo@it.uc3m.es>, Praveen Balasubramanian <pravb@microsoft.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <14D70C97-CB81-48A7-9EE1-D00C9FDCA59F@ifi.uio.no>
References: <CACpbDccBj3JKjPLjehgMcR=c5GybL=tF5BaV8k2Z-QGJtjUhJg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jana Iyengar <jri.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-UiO-SPF-Received: Received-SPF: neutral (mail-mx12.uio.no: 129.240.68.135 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of ifi.uio.no) client-ip=129.240.68.135; envelope-from=michawe@ifi.uio.no; helo=boomerang.ifi.uio.no;
X-UiO-Spam-info: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-5.0, required=5.0, autolearn=disabled, UIO_MAIL_IS_INTERNAL=-5, uiobl=NO, uiouri=NO)
X-UiO-Scanned: 1F00A453E58FDE753370A3C88BF166679CBF4C85
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iccrg/znKhn5vIzr3C0XL6E-ZQJFPkMdg>
Subject: Re: [iccrg] Adoption of rLEDBAT and LEDBAT++
X-BeenThere: iccrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussions of Internet Congestion Control Research Group \(ICCRG\)" <iccrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/iccrg>, <mailto:iccrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/iccrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:iccrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iccrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/iccrg>, <mailto:iccrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 12:32:45 -0000

in favor
these are very good things to document!

the world is using LBE way too little  :)


> On 11 Feb 2020, at 13:23, Jana Iyengar <jri.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> As promised in Singapore, I am proposing adoption of the following drafts in ICCRG:
> LEDBAT++: draft-balasubramanian-iccrg-ledbatplusplus-01
> rLEDBAT: draft-bagnulo-iccrg-rledbat-01
> 
> I don't think we need to have a long discussion on process here, and I believe we can figure it out as it goes. But I will summarize what I said in Singapore. Adoption here simply means that the RG thinks these are well-documented solutions to potentially important problems. We expect the authors to iterate on the drafts with continuous engagement with the RG. Our intent is to only ship documents that have rough consensus.
> 
> If folks have an opinion on the adoption of either of these documents, either in favor or opposing, please respond on this thread. I will close this call in about 2 weeks, modulo discussion or opinions opposing adoption.
> 
> - jana
> _______________________________________________
> iccrg mailing list
> iccrg@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/iccrg