IETF Logo Mail Archive

[PCN] "blind marking" not a big advantage

Michael Menth <menth@informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de> Mon, 25 February 2008 10:35 UTC

Return-Path: <pcn-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-pcn-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-pcn-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A76428C410; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 02:35:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.386
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.386 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.823, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
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 KKeHTDXUHTb9; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 02:35:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 742393A6CDD; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 02:34:42 -0800 (PST)
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 9D8CE3A6CB5 for <pcn@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 02:34:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
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 kPqxq4tKGi+U for <pcn@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 02:34:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailrelay.rz.uni-wuerzburg.de (wrzx28.rz.uni-wuerzburg.de [132.187.3.28]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E90528C410 for <pcn@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 02:33:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from virusscan.mail (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailrelay.mail (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B6BCA063B for <pcn@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:33:04 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by virusscan.mail (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F732A0613 for <pcn@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:33:04 +0100 (CET)
Received: from europa.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de (wicx01.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de [132.187.11.1]) by mailmaster.uni-wuerzburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CA32A0611 for <pcn@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:33:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: from nero.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de (win3005.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de [132.187.106.5]) by europa.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de (8.11.3/8.11.2/SuSE Linux 8.11.1-0.5) with ESMTP id m1PAX3V06655 for <pcn@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:33:03 +0100
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (nero.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de [132.187.106.5]) by nero.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB95BC866B for <pcn@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:33:03 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <47C29923.30607@informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:32:03 +0100
From: Michael Menth <menth@informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de>
Organization: University of Wuerzburg
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pcn <pcn@ietf.org>
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at uni-wuerzburg.de
Subject: [PCN] "blind marking" not a big advantage
X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: menth@informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de
List-Id: PCN WG list <pcn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn>, <mailto:pcn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/pcn>
List-Post: <mailto:pcn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pcn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn>, <mailto:pcn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: pcn-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: pcn-bounces@ietf.org

Hi,

I have seen that some encoding discussions underlined the benefit of 
"blind marking", i.e. the codepoint can be set without reading the ECN 
bits before. I just want to point out that this advantage is not so big 
because the meter needs to know the marking anyway to avoid that 
termination marked packets are metered. I just copied from the 
comparison draft 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-charny-pcn-comparison-00.txt

   |-------------------------------------------------------------------|
   |Metering and  | do not meter  |  meter all pkts  | do not meter    |
   |remarking of  | AM-marked     |  for admission   | TM-marked pkts  |
   |previously    | packets       |  and termination;| for termination |
   |marked        |               |  do not re-mark  | meter all pkts;|
   |packets       |               |  TM-marked pkts  | for admission,  |
   |              |               |                  | do not re-mark  |
   |              |               |                  | TM-marked pkts  |
   |-------------------------------------------------------------------|


Regards,

    Michael

-- 
Dr. Michael Menth, Assistant Professor
University of Wuerzburg, Institute of Computer Science
Am Hubland, D-97074 Wuerzburg, Germany, room B206
phone: (+49)-931/888-6644, fax: (+49)-931/888-6632
mailto:menth@informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de
http://www3.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de/research/ngn

_______________________________________________
PCN mailing list
PCN@ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email