RE: [ippm] Review of: draft-ietf-ippm-reordering-12.txt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org 
> [mailto:owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mark Allman
> Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2006 10:47 PM
> To: Al Morton
> Cc: Wijnen, Bert (Bert); Romascanu, Dan (Dan); ippm@ietf.org; 
> Mreview (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [ippm] Review of: draft-ietf-ippm-reordering-12.txt 
> 
> 
> Al-
> 
> > Yes, but your comments on this applied to section 3.
> > 
> > We use the message number in the reordering singleton 
> definition.  We 
> > also agreed to keep SrcTime as a mandatory parameter, and 
> mention time 
> > and bytes only as secondary means to determine order.  When we 
> > discussed this in Minneapolis last year, you came to the 
> mic to agree 
> > with this, even where we did not implement your comments 
> verbatim (as 
> > with the SrcTime parameter).  A summary of comments and responses is
> > here: http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/05mar/slides/ippm-1.pdf
> > 
> > We're discussing a later section here (4.5), and you expressed no 
> > objections about using time to quantify the extent of reordering, 
> > AFAIK.
> 
> Doh!  This is what I get for not going back and looking at the draft.
> You're right that my objection was in terms of determining 
> the out-of-orderness and not determining the extent or the 
> characteristics this dynamic created.  I do support the use 
> of time for characterizing reordering events, just not for 
> determining the event.  But, somehow I misread the context of 
> Bert's note.  In any case, sorry for the spurious chud.  I'll 
> shut up now! :)
> 
> allman
> 
> 

The context of the question is the comment made by Bert Wijnen wrt.
Section 4.5 of the document in preparation of the discussion of the
document in the IESG on 4/27. Bert is asking how 'would the metric be
comparable from one to the other measurement if one of them uses msg
sequence numbers, while the other uses "units of time". Even if two of
them use "units of time" but different units (e.g. micro seconds vs
milliseconds) even then they would not be comparable.'

I believe that his question is still pending. 

Dan

> 
> 

_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
ippm@ietf.org 
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm