Re: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this time
<philip.eardley@bt.com> Tue, 20 March 2012 16:46 UTC
Return-Path: <philip.eardley@bt.com>
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 56A6321F85D5 for <pcn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 09:46:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.441
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.441 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.157, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 rJ2mW1b8soZE for <pcn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 09:46:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpe1.intersmtp.com (smtp61.intersmtp.com [62.239.224.234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E950C21F85F0 for <pcn@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 09:46:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EVMHT69-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net (10.36.3.129) by RDW083A005ED61.smtp-e1.hygiene.service (10.187.98.10) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.213.0; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 16:46:20 +0000
Received: from EMV65-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net ([169.254.2.164]) by EVMHT69-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net ([10.36.3.129]) with mapi; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 16:46:19 +0000
From: philip.eardley@bt.com
To: sob@harvard.edu, pcn@ietf.org
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 16:46:19 +0000
Thread-Topic: lets try again - a chair asking this time
Thread-Index: AQHNBreta/Ow8il9OUGlwXRtWwuu+5ZzZAvg
Message-ID: <9510D26531EF184D9017DF24659BB87F331D442A7C@EMV65-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net>
References: <201203201634.q2KGYPJY020918@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk> <4491D33D-6A78-4341-A334-DFE6C4870C65@harvard.edu>
In-Reply-To: <4491D33D-6A78-4341-A334-DFE6C4870C65@harvard.edu>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US, en-GB
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_9510D26531EF184D9017DF24659BB87F331D442A7CEMV65UKRDdoma_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [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 16:46:22 -0000
Seems good to me. I like the inclusion of material previously in both the edge behaviour docs From: pcn-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pcn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bradner, Scott Sent: 20 March 2012 16:37 To: pcn@ietf.org Subject: [PCN] lets try again - a chair asking this time please let the list know what you think Scott Scott O Bradner Senior Technology Consultant Begin forwarded message: Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 03:30:11 +0000 To: "PCN IETF list" <pcn@ietf.org<mailto:pcn@ietf.org>> From: Bob Briscoe <bob.briscoe@bt.com<mailto: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 > 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<mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org>> To: <pcn-chairs@tools.ietf.org<mailto:pcn-chairs@tools.ietf.org>>, <draft-ietf-pcn-3-in-1-encoding@tools.ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-pcn-3-in-1-encoding@tools.ietf.org>>, <ietfdbh@comcast.net<mailto:ietfdbh@comcast.net>>, <adrian@olddog.co.uk<mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk>>, <rjsparks@nostrum.com<mailto: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 Diff from previous version: 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