Re: [PCN] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcn-marking-behaviour-03.txt
<Black_David@emc.com> Wed, 01 July 2009 16:12 UTC
Return-Path: <Black_David@emc.com>
X-Original-To: pcn@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pcn@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3072F3A6862; Wed, 1 Jul 2009 09:12:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.122
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.122 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.823, BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_LIST=2.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id um4ziM2O6Ctn; Wed, 1 Jul 2009 09:12:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com (mexforward.lss.emc.com [128.222.32.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E90013A692D; Wed, 1 Jul 2009 09:11:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hop04-l1d11-si03.isus.emc.com (HOP04-L1D11-SI03.isus.emc.com [10.254.111.23]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.3.2/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id n61GAdtt004667 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 1 Jul 2009 12:10:39 -0400
Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (nagas.lss.emc.com [10.254.144.15]) by hop04-l1d11-si03.isus.emc.com (Tablus Interceptor); Wed, 1 Jul 2009 12:10:33 -0400
Received: from corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com (corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com [10.254.64.53]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.3.2mp/Switch-3.3.2mp) with ESMTP id n61GATYO025608; Wed, 1 Jul 2009 12:10:32 -0400
Received: from CORPUSMX80A.corp.emc.com ([10.254.89.202]) by corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 1 Jul 2009 12:10:30 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2009 12:10:29 -0400
Message-ID: <9FA859626025B64FBC2AF149D97C944A03210F1F@CORPUSMX80A.corp.emc.com>
In-Reply-To: <9FA859626025B64FBC2AF149D97C944A02FE0ACB@CORPUSMX80A.corp.emc.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcn-marking-behaviour-03.txt
Thread-Index: AcietuD6zRiwq9zOTSK6y1+D8tbCgVRffacwAow9RlA=
References: <9FA859626025B64FBC2AF149D97C944A02FE0ACB@CORPUSMX80A.corp.emc.com>
From: Black_David@emc.com
To: Black_David@emc.com, philip.eardley@bt.com, gen-art@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Jul 2009 16:10:30.0450 (UTC) FILETIME=[74798920:01C9FA66]
X-EMM-EM: Active
Cc: pcn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [PCN] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcn-marking-behaviour-03.txt
X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: PCN WG list <pcn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:12:28 -0000
The -04 version of this draft resolves all of my comments from the Gen-ART review of the -03 version. While it would be better to change the term "PCN-excess-rate" to something else in a perfect world, the world is not perfect - since that is now the established term for the concept of a PCN configured rate above which all traffic is excess, it should be left as is. Thanks, --David > -----Original Message----- > From: Black, David > Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 3:32 PM > To: philip.eardley@bt.com; Gen Art > Cc: Black, David; Scott Bradner; Steven Blake; Lars Eggert; > pcn@ietf.org > Subject: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcn-marking-behaviour-03.txt > > I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) > reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see > http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html). > > Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call > comments you may receive. > > Document: draft-ietf-pcn-marking-behaviour-03.txt > Reviewer: David L. Black > Review Date: 18 June 2008 > IETF LC End Date: 18 June 2008 > > Summary: > This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that > should be fixed before publication. > > Comments: > > This draft specified requirements on how the diffserv components > in a PCN node need to behave in order to support PCN. In addition > to specifying the requirements, an example algorithm (Appendix > A) and extensive implementation notes (Appendix B) are provided. > The implementation notes are very useful - the WG should be > commended for working through the practical implementation > considerations for this functionality up front as opposed to > leaving them to implementers to puzzle out. > > All of my comments are on relatively minor points: > > "PCN-excess-rate" strikes me as a bad name for a configured > throughput rate - I suggest choosing another term. Intuitively, > I would expect PCN-excess-rate to refer to traffic that is in > excess of a PCN configured rate. > > Section 2.1, 1st paragraph and Section B.3 need to cite a > reference for how the DSCP and ECN field values are used to > decide whether a packet is PCN or not. > > In Section 2.2, first bullet, what is "scheduling rate"? Please > supply a definition. > > Section 2.4 - the second bullet also applies to competing non-PCN > traffic (if that traffic is metered). The text needs to be adjusted > to allow for this. Try: > > A packet SHOULD NOT be metered ... > > o If the PCN-packet is already .... > > o If this PCN-node drops the packet. > > Section 2.5 could use a reminder that while competing non-PCN packets > may be metered, they MUST NOT be marked. This may have implications > for the marking behavior that are probably most usefully discussed > in Appendix B. > > Nits: > - At the end of the first paragraph in B.1 > "there needs to be" --> "there should be" > The "should" is lower case. > > - idnits 2.11.11 noted that there is now a -04 version of the > pcn-baseline-encoding draft, as was noted in the draft > shepherd's writeup. > > Thanks, > --David > ---------------------------------------------------- > David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer > EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA 01748 > +1 (508) 293-7953 FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786 > black_david@emc.com Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754 > ---------------------------------------------------- > >
- Re: [PCN] [Gen-art] Gen-ART review ofdraft-ietf-p… Black_David
- [PCN] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcn-marking-be… Black_David
- Re: [PCN] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcn-markin… philip.eardley
- Re: [PCN] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcn-markin… Michael Menth
- Re: [PCN] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcn-markin… Black_David
- Re: [PCN] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcn-markin… Steven Blake