Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion
Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com> Thu, 05 September 2002 21:14 UTC
Received: from loki.ietf.org (loki [10.27.2.29]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA06039; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 17:14:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from adm@localhost) by loki.ietf.org (8.9.1b+Sun/8.9.1) id RAA04730 for ietf-outbound.09@loki.ietf.org; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 17:00:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [10.27.2.28]) by loki.ietf.org (8.9.1b+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA04706 for <ietf-mainout@loki.ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 16:58:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) id QAA05623 for ietf-mainout@loki.ietf.org; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 16:57:21 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: ietf.org: majordom set sender to owner-ietf@ietf.org using -f
Received: from sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com [171.69.24.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA05619 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 16:57:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from FRED-W2K6.cisco.com (stealth-10-32-253-236.cisco.com [10.32.253.236]) by sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g85KwMdt000188; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 13:58:23 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20020905134955.041f06d8@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com>
X-Sender: fred@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 13:58:08 -0700
To: Jason Gao <jag@kinet.com.cn>
From: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <001f01c254dd$b30bdd40$5019e29f@fujitsu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Sender: owner-ietf@ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: ietf@ietf.org
At 09:11 PM 9/5/2002 +0800, Jason Gao wrote: >--- TCP with ECN extension > >has already been a practice of fuzzy-layering. > >TCP in the end system and IP in the intermediate systems share the two ECN >bits in the IP header. that is incorrect. First off, IP also is found in the end system, and uses the ECN bits. More important, though, is that TCP uses an IP service, through an IP-provided API. The TCPs negotiate whether they are willing to run ECN, and if they agree, they (on transmission) use the API feature that says "please tell my peer if this datagram experiences congestion", and (on reception) use the API feature that says whether or not congestion was experienced somewhere in the network. All other communication regarding ECN is via the transport header. SCTP also has a defined facility for the transport exchange relevant to ECN. If your implementation delivers the IP header to or from TCP or SCTP, then the implementation of the API in question is the passage of that header. I know of a number of implementations that do that; it certainly is a convenient approach. However, I don't see any requirement that the API take that form, and I know some very common implementations that don't. I don't see any significant difference between using a service of this type, and using a service that says "please send this message as urgent data" to TCP, or "please send this message with this DSCP" to IP, or "please send this message without permitting fragmentation" to IP. It's just a service accessed through the API.
- Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion vinton g. cerf
- Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion Jason Gao
- Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion Fred Baker
- Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion Jason Gao
- Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion Jason Gao
- Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion Jim Fleming
- Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion Jim Fleming
- ECN....Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion Jim Fleming
- Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion Jason Gao
- Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion Jason Gao
- Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion - Towards b… Jason Gao
- Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion - Towards b… Fred Baker
- Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion - Towards b… Jason Gao
- Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion - Towards b… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Fuzzy-layering and its suggestion - Towards b… Brian E Carpenter
- Using the 8-bit TOS field for Extended Addressing… Jim Fleming
- Re: Fuzzy-layering... - Towards better QoS soluti… Jason Gao