IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ippm] Adoption Call for draft-morton-ippm-capacity-metric-method

"MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acm@research.att.com> Wed, 20 November 2019 02:56 UTC

Return-Path: <acm@research.att.com>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FFDF12092A for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 18:56:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 3GuVNpR_AEuH for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 18:56:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (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 189741200B8 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 18:56:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0053301.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id xAK2tFjL019118 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 21:56:38 -0500
Received: from tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (sbcsmtp3.sbc.com [144.160.112.28]) by mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2wck70ysv9-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 21:56:38 -0500
Received: from enaf.dadc.sbc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id xAK2ub1l020126 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 20:56:37 -0600
Received: from zlp30495.vci.att.com (zlp30495.vci.att.com [135.46.181.158]) by tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id xAK2uUto020045 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 20:56:31 -0600
Received: from zlp30495.vci.att.com (zlp30495.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30495.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id BD4794005C29 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 02:56:30 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (unknown [135.41.1.46]) by zlp30495.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 9FA6C4005C2A for <ippm@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 02:56:30 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from sldc.sbc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id xAK2uUL0027522 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 20:56:30 -0600
Received: from mail-blue.research.att.com (mail-blue.research.att.com [135.207.178.11]) by clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id xAK2uQXN027277 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 20:56:26 -0600
Received: from exchange.research.att.com (njbdcas1.research.att.com [135.197.255.61]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1552F0848 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 21:56:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: from njmtexg5.research.att.com ([fe80::b09c:ff13:4487:78b6]) by njbdcas1.research.att.com ([fe80::8c6b:4b77:618f:9a01%11]) with mapi id 14.03.0468.000; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 21:56:25 -0500
From: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acm@research.att.com>
To: "STARK, BARBARA H" <bs7652@att.com>, 'IETF IPPM WG' <ippm@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [ippm] Adoption Call for draft-morton-ippm-capacity-metric-method
Thread-Index: AQHVncQ9DHKLu7i9K0Ks+PdKpOVYz6eTsNUA//+tVDA=
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 02:56:25 +0000
Message-ID: <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CFA6EFB9D3@njmtexg5.research.att.com>
References: <6B233CAB-7D88-4258-8C8D-BCA99E4E3C48@trammell.ch> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611536E7B3F@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com>
In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611536E7B3F@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [31.133.132.255]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.95,18.0.572 definitions=2019-11-19_08:2019-11-15,2019-11-19 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 clxscore=1015 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=999 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-1910280000 definitions=main-1911200026
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/12NLsQURnOfZQNKdEF56vTr-I8I>
Subject: Re: [ippm] Adoption Call for draft-morton-ippm-capacity-metric-method
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 02:56:41 -0000

Thanks for your support/scan/questions, Barbara!

Regarding
> I would like to understand plans for creation of one or more Performance
> Metrics registry entries (should registry entries be specified? should
> this draft specify registry entries?).

The registry has a requirement of "wide-spread deployment*" for metric
registration, so if pre-RFC-approval reaches that goal, then we should
also include a section that contains the text of the proposed Registry Entry.

I guess that we could anticipate adoption and write the registry entry anyway,
in an Appendix.  I think that covers all bases.

@@@@ Write a Registry Entry for Max IP-Layer Capacity

Al

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ippm [mailto:ippm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of STARK, BARBARA H
> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 9:43 PM
> To: 'IETF IPPM WG' <ippm@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [ippm] Adoption Call for draft-morton-ippm-capacity-metric-
> method
> 
> *** Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT&T ***.
> Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information.
> 
> > The IPPM working group has been asked to adopt draft-morton-ippm-
> > capacity-metric-method-01 as as a working group document.
> >
> > This message begins an adoption call to end on Monday 9 December 2019.
> > Please send a message to ippm@ietf.orgindicating:
> >
> > - whether you believe the draft is in scope for the WG and mature enough
> to
> > be a WG document, and if not, why not
> > - whether you are willing to review the document
> 
> I've scanned through the document and find it well-organized, very
> readable, and has most of the info I was hoping to find. I've also run
> these tests on my gigabit broadband connection at home -- and they work
> great!
> I would like to understand plans for creation of one or more Performance
> Metrics registry entries (should registry entries be specified? should
> this draft specify registry entries?).
> I think the doc is in scope and mature, and am willing to review (in more
> detail than my quick scan).
> I support adoption.
> Barbara
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ippm mailing list
> ippm@ietf.org
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_ippm&d=DwICAg&c=LFYZ-
> o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=OfsSu8kTIltVyD1oL72cBw&m=kfsoSQtTDu4waHbs8rFouGlX8ANBG
> Pe1vZ6Nzy6MLEE&s=7OGLGX9N1IEATXA21HeSqT52dhhF8Dv0oRRXcXzQ0tU&e=

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email