[manet] comments on draft-berger-manet-dlep-ether-credit-extension

"Velt, R. (Ronald) in 't" <Ronald.intVelt@tno.nl> Thu, 15 July 2021 17:25 UTC

Return-Path: <Ronald.intVelt@tno.nl>
X-Original-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E9FA3A11F2 for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 10:25:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=tno.nl
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o6aRiDzpJedW for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 10:25:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fromintouta.tno.nl (fromintouta.tno.nl []) (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 D572B3A11ED for <manet@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 10:25:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tno.nl; l=9308; s=mta1; t=1626369948; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=fmk4xikPTKfBr8X/mUb/bv8qf5/CFwzfwyFBkGr3V/o=; b=wJzPhu0NGOu5Eown+g1tACu8a8WQ5f9hjOqEQJcQiwmxi3icGYpDsxEq u3Zk/wdTe/Zc5fGssOmh77uJ9TQOudIQL+TC5v/Pjk2PnX6kfiVRVc6TV XAW9l/lRo+Ad8ACphq8aJCg+gug8ePMfqCbwIDIovqy4p8AwfGS7jhqHN 8=;
IronPort-SDR: r3C/j5TzI5wDV3FIA9/T3OgTY1E5XFWGUMjNqEvNSQID7K79XLboyB6tWyanim/69e78izGdju 4DVfoUu21PbJHnuf5Clpn0sKKQ9PTXJvKCKUU2bUUlDtrBoSx/Q6EpEw7MDn9KWBhKfQtj6KXo NRZR4WT5zo+LYxYJLJquDhkU9bOhuF0WrYBMKkkwaFVt01T6GiVs0tr0jh9sX+8NlRCEEhD1v0 1vDBXKqPctNEufhSZOuYe3zo2NMNWFHg2c42FKrfZFuv0lfaLyzQ/bvz5hkJeZ1lcDolouh4Ur BToxf8nklqPQrHf9ZvDIj35u
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.84,242,1620684000"; d="scan'208,217"; a="32454830"
Received: from UCP13.tsn.tno.nl ( by UCP32.tsn.tno.nl ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2242.4; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 19:25:43 +0200
Received: from UCP13.tsn.tno.nl ([fe80::c142:976e:5281:8298]) by UCP13.tsn.tno.nl ([fe80::c142:976e:5281:8298%7]) with mapi id 15.01.2242.004; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 19:25:43 +0200
From: "Velt, R. (Ronald) in 't" <Ronald.intVelt@tno.nl>
To: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>, "Wiggins, David - 0665 - MITLL" <David.Wiggins@ll.mit.edu>, "manet@ietf.org" <manet@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: comments on draft-berger-manet-dlep-ether-credit-extension
Thread-Index: Add5nYy20wNTrZbBQS+FtNNdOIko8w==
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 17:25:43 +0000
Message-ID: <c3e50cd966444de4ac83d184672344f1@tno.nl>
Accept-Language: en-US, nl-NL
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
x-esetresult: clean, is OK
x-esetid: 37303A29D68AA76F647165
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_c3e50cd966444de4ac83d184672344f1tnonl_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manet/XPxug7QCNXWjyY4Jg4wPddoOWcM>
Subject: [manet] comments on draft-berger-manet-dlep-ether-credit-extension
X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks <manet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/manet/>
List-Post: <mailto:manet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 17:25:53 -0000

Hi Authors, WG participants,

Please find below my comments (as WG participant) on draft-berger-manet-dlep-ether-credit-extension.



Major Issues


Minor Issues

Section 1, Introduction, contains the somewhat puzzling sentence "Traffic sent by a router will use traffic flow classification information provided by the modem to identify which traffic is associated with each credit window." I would think it is the router, as opposed to the traffic, that uses the classification information. The traffic, which may originate from an upstream source, is what it is. But then the question is HOW the router should make use of the classification information. Should it e.g. set IEEE 802.1Q PCPs on particular flows to ensure that they receive preferential treatment (i.e., are throttled last in case of congestion)? In my opinion, at the very least the sentence quoted above should be rephrased; in addition some further clarification on the mechanism foreseen could be helpful.


Section 1

3rd para: "... to provided credit window based flow control ..." => "... to provide credit window based flow control ..."

3rd para: "... based on on DLEP destination and Ethernet VLANs and Priority Code Points. " => "... based on DLEP destinations and Ethernet VLANs and Priority Code Points. "

3rd para: "...shared across traffic sent to multiple DLEP destinations VLANs, and PCPs, ..." => "...shared across traffic sent to multiple DLEP destinations, VLANs and PCPs, ..."

Section 2

1st para: "... the Ethernet Traffic Classification Sub Data Item," => "... the Ethernet Traffic Classification Sub-Data Item," (following the precedent set by RFC8651)

This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are requested to inform the sender and delete the message. TNO accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail, for the manner in which you use it and for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent to the electronic transmission of messages.