[PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this time
"Bradner, Scott" <sob@harvard.edu> Tue, 20 March 2012 16:37 UTC
Return-Path: <sob@harvard.edu>
X-Original-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B6F621F8702 for <pcn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 09:37:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.191
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.191 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 ECQMsFWLuk1Z for <pcn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 09:37:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ackroyd.harvard.edu (ackroyd.harvard.edu [128.103.208.29]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D66D221F8701 for <pcn@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 09:37:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exchange.university.harvard.edu (unknown [10.35.2.151]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ackroyd.harvard.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 901EDE8FFD for <pcn@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 12:37:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ENTWHUBT0000002.university.harvard.edu (192.168.36.23) by ENTWEDGE0000000.university.harvard.edu (10.35.2.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.355.2; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 12:36:42 -0400
Received: from ENTWEXMB0000004.university.harvard.edu ([169.254.3.128]) by entwhubt0000002.university.harvard.edu ([192.168.36.46]) with mapi id 14.01.0355.002; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 12:37:02 -0400
From: "Bradner, Scott" <sob@harvard.edu>
To: "pcn@ietf.org" <pcn@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: lets try again - a chair asking this time
Thread-Index: AQHNBreta/Ow8il9OUGlwXRtWwuu+w==
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 16:37:01 +0000
Message-ID: <4491D33D-6A78-4341-A334-DFE6C4870C65@harvard.edu>
References: <201203201634.q2KGYPJY020918@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [140.247.60.212]
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <0F550AD3277E5D4FA682F948966D5D94@Exchange.university.harvard.edu>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this time
X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: PCN WG list <pcn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pcn>, <mailto:pcn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pcn>
List-Post: <mailto:pcn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pcn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn>, <mailto:pcn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 16:37:11 -0000
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 03:30:11 +0000
To: "PCN IETF list" <pcn@ietf.org>
From: Bob Briscoe <bob.briscoe@bt.com>
Subject: New Version: draft-ietf-pcn-3-in-1-encoding-09.txt
PCN folks,
Following IESG review (particularly Adrian Farrel's being the most comprehensive and useful), we've posted a new version of the PCN 3-in-1 encoding.
As well as a number of editorial changes, some technical changes were needed in order to satisfy Adrian's request to specify exactly what an implementer has to do at the ingress to allow ECN to co-exist with PCN, and what defaults should be set to.
In particular, for a non-PCN packet (i.e. doesn't match any flow-state) that clashes with a PCN DSCP and is ECN-capable, the recommended choice of 3 is:
* re-mark the DSCP to a DSCP that is not PCN-compatible;
[...] In the absence of any operator-specific configuration for this case, by default an implementation SHOULD re-mark the DSCP to zero.
Actually, the whole of the ingress behaviour section (5.1) has been re-written, incorporating material that was previously repeated in both edge-behaviours (agreed with IESG and with edge-behaviour authors, of course). Altho it largely does the same thing technically, it is written to cover the complete range of possible scenarios, and it now gives defaults and recommended choices. I don't think it's controversial, but shout if it is.
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pcn-3-in-1-encoding-09#section-5.1" rel="nofollow"> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pcn-3-in-1-encoding-09#section-5.1 >
Bob
PS. Changes From draft-ietf-pcn-3-in-1-encoding-08 to -09:
* Added note about fail-safe to protect other traffic in the
event of tunnel misconfiguration.
* Changed section heading to be about applicability of
environments to the encoding, rather than the encoding to the
environments.
* Completely re-wrote PCN-ingress Node Behaviour section.
* Changed PCN interior node to PCN-node where the term was
intended to include all PCN-nodes.
* Clarified status of ECN/PCN co-existence appendix. Removed
inconsistent assertion in this appendix that an admission-
control DSCP alone can indicate that arriving traffic is PCN-
traffic.
* A few clarifying editorial amendments and updated refs.
From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org>
To: <pcn-chairs@tools.ietf.org>,
<draft-ietf-pcn-3-in-1-encoding@tools.ietf.org>, <ietfdbh@comcast.net>,
<adrian@olddog.co.uk>, <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 17:52:23 -0700
Subject: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-pcn-3-in-1-encoding-09.txt
New version (-09) has been submitted for draft-ietf-pcn-3-in-1-encoding-09.txt.
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pcn-3-in-1-encoding-09.txt" rel="nofollow">http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pcn-3-in-1-encoding-09.txt
Diff from previous version:
http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pcn-3-in-1-encoding-09" rel="nofollow">http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pcn-3-in-1-encoding-09
IETF Secretariat.
________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe, BT Innovate & Design________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe, BT Innovate & Design
- [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this time Bradner, Scott
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… philip.eardley
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… Toby Moncaster
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… karagian
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… James M. Polk
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… Michael Menth
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… Ruediger.Geib
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… philip.eardley
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… philip.eardley
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… Bob Briscoe
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… Bob Briscoe
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… Bradner, Scott
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… Bob Briscoe
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… Bradner, Scott
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… Michael Menth
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… Ruediger.Geib
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… philip.eardley
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… Toby Moncaster
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… karagian
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… Bob Briscoe
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… Michael Menth
- Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this ti… Bob Briscoe