Re: [re-ECN] Pls respond: Do we have a Congestion Exposure community?

Barbara van Schewick <schewick@stanford.edu> Mon, 07 September 2009 21:05 UTC

Return-Path: <schewick@stanford.edu>
X-Original-To: re-ecn@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: re-ecn@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C65B3A67FC for <re-ecn@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Sep 2009 14:05:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 ZPN6nX5rc441 for <re-ecn@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Sep 2009 14:05:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.stanford.edu (smtp4.Stanford.EDU [171.67.219.84]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACF7D3A67B6 for <re-ecn@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Sep 2009 14:05:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.stanford.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id A2120C58F; Mon, 7 Sep 2009 14:05:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zm09.stanford.edu (zm09.Stanford.EDU [171.67.219.159]) by smtp.stanford.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65311C506; Mon, 7 Sep 2009 14:05:22 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2009 14:05:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Barbara van Schewick <schewick@stanford.edu>
To: re-ecn@ietf.org
Message-ID: <120431317.2834301252357522358.JavaMail.root@zm09.stanford.edu>
In-Reply-To: <1805380387.2833741252357209384.JavaMail.root@zm09.stanford.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [171.64.213.145]
X-Mailer: Zimbra 5.0.18_GA_3039.RHEL4_64 (ZimbraWebClient - FF3.0 (Win)/5.0.18_GA_3039.RHEL4_64)
X-Authenticated-User: schewick@stanford.edu
Subject: Re: [re-ECN] Pls respond: Do we have a Congestion Exposure community?
X-BeenThere: re-ecn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: re-inserted explicit congestion notification <re-ecn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn>, <mailto:re-ecn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/re-ecn>
List-Post: <mailto:re-ecn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:re-ecn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn>, <mailto:re-ecn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2009 21:05:29 -0000

I'm very interested in this. I'm particularly interested in the business and policy implications of re-ECN. 

Barbara
---
Barbara van Schewick
Assistant Professor of Law and (by Courtesy) Electrical Engineering
Director, Center for Internet and Society
Stanford Law School

Crown Quadrangle
559 Nathan Abbott Way
Stanford, CA94305-8610

Phone:  650-723 8340
E-Mail: schewick@stanford.edu

>Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2009 17:33:36 +0100
>To: re-ecn@ietf.org
>From: Bob Briscoe <rbriscoe@jungle.bt.co.uk>
>Subject: Pls respond: Do we have a Congestion Exposure community?
>
>Folks,
>
>I'd like to try to arrange a Congestion Exposure (re-ECN) BoF in Nov 
>at the Hiroshima IETF. If so, we have to notify the area directors v 
>soon - by 24:00 UTC Mon 7 Sep 09. #1 gating function for Area 
>Directors: activity on an ietf list.
>
>Therefore, pls respond preferably *on this list* if you're 
>interested in being involved, no matter how insignificantly, e.g.
>
>- you want congestion visibility for other stuff you're doing
>   (but don't intend to work on it itself)
>- reviewing docs,
>- alternative way to achieve congestion exposure
>- participate in mailing list discussion,
>- co-authoring docs
>- design ways to do incremental deployment
>- using code for other stuff you're doing
>- thinking up new uses for the protocol
>- breaking it
>- analysing benefits/costs
>- implement protocol
>- implement a demo
>- running or participating in trials
>- standing on the sidelines booing or clapping
>- whatever
>
>Perceived problem:
>Most people want to work on something finite like a new cool 
>non-TCP-friendly congestion control. Less people want to go into an 
>pseudo-infinite loop fixing IP to allow other cool stuff to happen. 
>If you want something like re-ECN to be there, but don't have the 
>bandwidth to work on it, that's cool too - please say this - it's 
>still palpable support. And you will be likely to have review 
>comments related to how you want to use it.
>
>Cheers
>
>
>Bob
>
>________________________________________________________________
>Bob Briscoe,               Networks Research Centre, BT Research