[ippm] Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-ippm-qoo-06

[Ike Kunze <[e-mail]>]

Hi Paul,

Please see inline ([IK]).

Cheers,
Ike


Friendly Note: I send emails at times that work best for me. Please don’t feel any pressure to reply outside your usual working hours.


[Background pattern  Description automatically generated]

Ike Kunze

Senior Researcher

Phone [phone]

CUJO AI<https://cujo.com/> | News <https://cujo.com/blog/> | LinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/company/cujoai>


From: Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]>
Date: Tuesday, 10 February 2026 at 16:46
To: Ike Kunze <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Cc: General Area Review Team <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-ippm-qoo-06

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.


Hi Ile,

On 2/10/26 7:55 AM, Ike Kunze wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Thank you very much for taking the time to review the draft!
>
> You are right in that the measurements / reported percentiles of
> different network segments need to be the same to enable composability.
> Ensuring this alignment across different networks / operators might be
> challenging, especially considering that the draft does not impose
> standardized percentiles for the network performance requirements of
> applications.
> The draft does follow BITAG recommendations regarding
> measurement percentiles, though, and I think that once we have a better
> understanding which measurement percentiles have the most meaning for
> applications (with application “profiles" then also using those
> percentiles), alignment across operators could very well just follow
> naturally.
> Even if it does not follow, there is still a lot of value to be gained
> by just using the methodology on different network segments within the
> same network.
>
> I believe we already have some limited (implicit) text along this line
> in the document. If you see value in clarifying possible deployment /
> adoption challenges beyond what we currently have, we could add some
> additional, explicit discussion focusing on this aspect in the
> operational consideration section.
> What do you think?

It was the existing text that mentions the need for alignment of
percentiles, in a different context, that led me to ask the question.

I do believe it is important to add a discussion about the challenges to
successful deployment, including the challenges to composability. How
useful will this method be without composability over the end-to-end
path? And how will that alignment be achieved?

[IK] Makes sense. We’ll add an explicit discussion on this.

Toward that end, it would be helpful if you included some important
use-cases. For instance, a way for an end user to obtain statistics for
their own network attachment, for the ways they use the network.

[IK] The draft already touches on different use cases in Section 4 but with a slightly different focus (i.e., on deducing “requirements” for the QoO framework). Based on your comments, I think that it might make sense to pick up the use cases again in the deployment considerations section, e.g., to discuss what deployment aspects are needed to realize which use case. We’ll give this a try, thanks for the suggestion!

> Regarding the presentation of the formulas, you have probably also seen
> in the thread with Martin that we plan to (at the very least) implement
> his suggestion that you also refer to in your comment. Additionally,
> Martin has kindly provided me additional pointers for alternative forms
> of formula rendering and we plan to also explore these options to come
> up with a version that is as clear and easy to understand as possible.
> I would very much appreciate your feedback on the final version once we
> have it.

Yes, I have been following that. And will be happy to review the changes
you ultimately make.

[IK] Great to hear, will keep you posted!

        Thanks,
        Paul


This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.