Re: [icnrg] I-D Action: draft-oran-icnrg-qosarch-05.txt

"David R. Oran" <daveoran@orandom.net> Wed, 26 August 2020 14:37 UTC

Return-Path: <daveoran@orandom.net>
X-Original-To: icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93FFF3A152C for <icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 07:37:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 fSNf-tKrWdXm for <icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 07:37:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from spark.crystalorb.net (spark.crystalorb.net [IPv6:2607:fca8:1530::c]) (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 D51FF3A1564 for <icnrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 07:37:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.15.242] ([IPv6:2601:184:407f:80ce:f59f:e2fd:9d2b:1676]) (authenticated bits=0) by spark.crystalorb.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4+deb7u1) with ESMTP id 07QEbVhd026457 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 26 Aug 2020 07:37:33 -0700
From: "David R. Oran" <daveoran@orandom.net>
To: "Akbar Rahman" <Akbar.Rahman@InterDigital.com>
Cc: "Kutscher, Dirk" <ietf@dkutscher.net>, icnrg@irtf.org
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 10:37:25 -0400
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5708)
Message-ID: <08BEEBA4-3CA8-441B-A4C1-7ED8EF8D8E27@orandom.net>
In-Reply-To: <MN2PR10MB31498B814111DF12CC5475AEE7540@MN2PR10MB3149.namprd10.prod.outlook.com>
References: <159829391531.14858.3244605696257852399@ietfa.amsl.com> <8AF16F4F-CE6F-429F-B7B9-75B4C4D3284F@dkutscher.net> <MN2PR10MB31498B814111DF12CC5475AEE7540@MN2PR10MB3149.namprd10.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/icnrg/qxlKgYKhgb2NEdBItgeBCLvtRas>
Subject: Re: [icnrg] I-D Action: draft-oran-icnrg-qosarch-05.txt
X-BeenThere: icnrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Information-Centric Networking research group discussion list <icnrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/icnrg>, <mailto:icnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/icnrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:icnrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:icnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg>, <mailto:icnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 14:37:48 -0000

On 26 Aug 2020, at 10:23, Akbar Rahman wrote:

> Hi Dirk/Dave,
>
>
> I had read it a while ago, and have just re-read it now.  Overall, a 
> very nice draft and I support progressing it.
>
> Just two suggestions for editorial clarification:
>
> - "TCP/IP" is referred to in various sections, and then afterwards the 
> "IP protocol stack" is mentioned once in section 3.2.  Wouldn't it be 
> better to use "IP protocol stack" as the generic reference instead of 
> "TCP/IP".  This is because one is never sure if by "TCP/IP" you also 
> mean to include UDP or not?  And now with the rolling out of QUIC/HTTP 
> (which is UDP based) this distinction becomes more important.  This 
> can become a minor or major point of confusion depending on the 
> reader's background.  I've gotten this feedback myself on other drafts 
> that I have written.
>
I haven’t encountered this problem, especially as I’m using it in a 
mostly historical context, but I get the point. I’m not sure 
“stack” is the right word either, since I definitely am not talking 
about anything at the application layer, like HTTP, SMTP, et.al. I’ll 
give this some thought and if I can excise the explicit “TCP” 
reference without getting too wordy e.g. (“Internet and transport 
layer protocols”), or just get away with “IP”, I will make the 
change.

> - Is it wise to entitle section 7.7 as "Strawman principles for an ICN 
> QoS architecture" since strawman usually has a negative implication 
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man ) ?
>
…which is intentional in the sense that they are loose principles, for 
possible replacement in a “real” architecture, and may fall over if 
pushed even moderately hard. I’m happy to keep this connotation to 
ensure people approach this with the right degree of skepticism.

Thanks for the comments!
DaveO.

>
>
> /Akbar
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: icnrg <icnrg-bounces@irtf.org> On Behalf Of Dirk Kutscher
> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 5:07 AM
> To: icnrg@irtf.org
> Subject: Re: [icnrg] I-D Action: draft-oran-icnrg-qosarch-05.txt
>
> Hello ICNRG,
>
> Dave has kindly updated the QoS Architecture Considerations draft, 
> responding to earlier comments from Eve during IRSG review.
>
> I was wondering what people think of this revision. Check out the diff 
> to see the changes.
>
> If we are generally happy with it, I'd like to pass it back to the 
> IRSG on Monday, August 31st.
>
> As a reminder, this is an individual submission, not a RG document as 
> most of our RFCs-to-be. Still, any feedback would be appreciated, of 
> course.
>
> Thanks,
> Dirk
>
>
>
>
>
> On 24 Aug 2020, at 20:31, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
>
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>> directories.
>> This draft is a work item of the Information-Centric Networking RG of
>> the IRTF.
>>
>>         Title           : Considerations in the development of a QoS
>> Architecture for CCNx-like ICN protocols
>>         Author          : Dave Oran
>> Filename        : draft-oran-icnrg-qosarch-05.txt
>> Pages           : 28
>> Date            : 2020-08-24
>>
>> Abstract:
>>    This is a position paper.  It documents the author's personal 
>> views
>>    on how Quality of Service (QoS) capabilities ought to be
>> accommodated
>>    in ICN protocols like CCNx or NDN which employ flow-balanced
>>    Interest/Data exchanges and hop-by-hop forwarding state as their
>>    fundamental machinery.  It argues that such protocols demand a
>>    substantially different approach to QoS from that taken in TCP/IP,
>>    and proposes specific design patterns to achieve both
>> classification
>>    and differentiated QoS treatment on both a flow and aggregate
>> basis.
>>    It also considers the effect of caches in addition to memory, CPU
>> and
>>    link bandwidth as a resource that should be subject to explicitly
>>    unfair resource allocation.  The proposed methods are intended to
>>    operate purely at the network layer, providing the primitives
>> needed
>>    to achieve both transport and higher layer QoS objectives.  It
>>    explicitly excludes any discussion of Quality of Experience (QoE)
>>    which can only be assessed and controlled at the application layer
>> or
>>    above.
>>
>>    This document is not a product of the IRTF Information-Centric
>>    Networking Research Group (ICNRG) but has been through formal last
>>    call and has the support of the participants in the research group
>>    for publication as an individual submission.
>>
>>
>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-oran-icnrg-qosarch/
>>
>> There are also htmlized versions available at:
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-oran-icnrg-qosarch-05
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-oran-icnrg-qosarch-05
>>
>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-oran-icnrg-qosarch-05
>>
>>
>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
>> submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at
>> tools.ietf.org.
>>
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> icnrg mailing list
>> icnrg@irtf.org
>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg
>
> _______________________________________________
> icnrg mailing list
> icnrg@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg
> [Banner]
>
> [Banner]<https://idcc.me/3g4fCOg>
>
> ABI - Cloud Gaming: Enabling a Next Generation Gaming and Streaming 
> Paradigm<https://idcc.me/3g4fCOg>
> This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity 
> to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is 
> privileged, confidential and/or otherwise protected from disclosure to 
> anyone other than its intended recipient. Unintended transmission 
> shall not constitute waiver of any privilege or confidentiality 
> obligation. If you received this communication in error, please do not 
> review, copy or distribute it, notify me immediately by email, and 
> delete the original message and any attachments. Unless expressly 
> stated in this e-mail, nothing in this message or any attachment 
> should be construed as a digital or electronic signature.
>
> _______________________________________________
> icnrg mailing list
> icnrg@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg

DaveO