IETF Logo Mail Archive

[ledbat] initialization of current_delays in draft-ietf-ledbat-congestion-08

David Ros <David.Ros@telecom-bretagne.eu> Thu, 20 October 2011 09:11 UTC

Return-Path: <David.Ros@telecom-bretagne.eu>
X-Original-To: ledbat@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ledbat@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 821D221F84F8 for <ledbat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 02:11:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pNbShu-p5JfI for <ledbat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 02:11:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from coliposte.enst-bretagne.fr (coliposte.enst-bretagne.fr [192.108.115.12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 551E821F84DF for <ledbat@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 02:11:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by coliposte.enst-bretagne.fr (8.13.7/8.13.7/2009.11.10) with ESMTP id p9K9B2n5008638 for <ledbat@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 11:11:03 +0200
Received: from courrier.enst-bretagne.fr (smtps.enst-bretagne.fr [10.29.90.4]) by coliposte.enst-bretagne.fr (8.13.7/8.13.7/2009.11.10) with ESMTP id p9K9AsqU008550 for <ledbat@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 11:10:57 +0200
Received: from eduroam-193-157-113-173.uio.no (passerelle-interne.enst-bretagne.fr [192.108.117.210]) (user=dros mech=PLAIN bits=0) by courrier.enst-bretagne.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/2010.02.22) with ESMTP id p9K9Ap7F000532 for <ledbat@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 11:10:51 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
From: David Ros <David.Ros@telecom-bretagne.eu>
In-Reply-To: <791AD3077F94194BB2BDD13565B6295D1D0A463B@DAPHNIS.office.hd>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 11:10:51 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <32BB54A8-D41C-45C6-949E-F3060A6FF966@telecom-bretagne.eu>
References: <791AD3077F94194BB2BDD13565B6295D1D0A463B@DAPHNIS.office.hd>
To: ledbat@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at enst-bretagne.fr
Subject: [ledbat] initialization of current_delays in draft-ietf-ledbat-congestion-08
X-BeenThere: ledbat@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mailing list of the LEDBAT WG <ledbat.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ledbat>, <mailto:ledbat-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ledbat>
List-Post: <mailto:ledbat@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ledbat-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ledbat>, <mailto:ledbat-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:11:08 -0000

Hi,

After reading the current version of the draft, I was wondering (sorry if it's a very stupid question):

Why does the current_delays list have to be initialized to +INFINITY? ("on initialization:", sec. 3.4.2) I understand why that's the case for base_delays, but not for current_delays.

Thanks,

David.

PS: Jana and Mirja, I'll send you offline a list of typos I found.


=================================================================
David ROS
http://www.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr/~dros/

"But we're a university! [...] What sort of people would we be if we didn't go into the Library?" "Students." -- Terry Pratchett

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email