[Pals] Spencer Dawkins' Yes on draft-ietf-pals-congcons-01: (with COMMENT)
"Spencer Dawkins" <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 06 January 2016 22:59 UTC
Return-Path: <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: pals@ietf.org
Delivered-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B80E11A1B7D; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 14:59:07 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Spencer Dawkins <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.11.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <20160106225907.26779.28827.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 14:59:07 -0800
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pals/ZJW6mLoAz92f1lWo7ud_wK5UjCA>
Cc: pals-chairs@ietf.org, agmalis@gmail.com, pals@ietf.org, draft-ietf-pals-congcons@ietf.org
Subject: [Pals] Spencer Dawkins' Yes on draft-ietf-pals-congcons-01: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: pals@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
List-Id: "Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services dicussion list." <pals.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pals>, <mailto:pals-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pals/>
List-Post: <mailto:pals@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pals-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pals>, <mailto:pals-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 22:59:07 -0000
Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-pals-congcons-01: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pals-congcons/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- So, very nice. I have one request for you to consider. In this text: The figures presented above demonstrate that TDM service quality degradation generally occurs before the TDM PW would consume more bandwidth that a comparable TCP flow. Thus while TDM PWs are unable to respond to congestion in a TCP-like manner, TDM PWs that are able to deliver acceptable TDM service do not contribute to congestion significantly more than a TCP flow. Combined with our earlier conclusion that Ethernet PWs respond in TCP-like fashion, leads to our final conclusion that no PW-specific congestion-avoidance mechanisms are required. I can't tell whether or not you're saying that a TPM PW only needs a circuit breaker as an absolute last resort, or it doesn't need a circuit breaker, or something else. If you could finish the last sentence with a word about that, I think it would be helpful.
- [Pals] Spencer Dawkins' Yes on draft-ietf-pals-co… Spencer Dawkins
- Re: [Pals] Spencer Dawkins' Yes on draft-ietf-pal… Bob Briscoe