Re: [re-ECN] Expired re-ECN Internet Drafts

Out of interest could people let the list know if they have tried to
read either of these documents and if so whether they found them
intelligible or not? In particular I am looking for feedback on the
protocol document which I suspect has become almost impenetrably dense
over the past 8 revisions by 4 different people...

If people are struggling it may be worth releasing a lightweight
overview of the protocol before the BoF for non-experts to have a
starting point...

Toby

> -----Original Message-----
> From: re-ecn-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:re-ecn-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of alan.p.smith@bt.com
> Sent: 18 September 2009 13:31
> To: re-ecn@ietf.org
> Subject: [re-ECN] Expired re-ECN Internet Drafts
> 
> There are 2 Internet Drafts for re-ECN, which have recently expired.
> These are a description of the protocol:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-briscoe-tsvwg-re-ecn-tcp-07 and one
> described as a "motivation" for re-ECN:
>
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-briscoe-tsvwg-re-ecn-tcp-motivation-00
> which is actually more of an architecture for re-ECN or a framework
for
> using the protocol.
> 
> These 2 documents do need a re-write. I would hope that if the BOF
goes
> ahead then members of the community would want to shape these new
> documents, be they direct replacements or entirely new documents. At
> the
> very least we need a draft that properly documents the motivation for
> congestion awareness.
> 
> In the meantime the expired drafts can be updated only as a
keep-alive.
> I would like to take the opportunity to re-name the motivation to
> something more accurate, so propose renaming it to "A Framework for
> adding Congestion Accountability to TCP/IP".
> 
> Is there anyone who wants to contribute to new documents? It could be
> with providing content, editing, scoping, etc.
> 
> Alan
> 
> _______________________________________________
> re-ECN mailing list
> re-ECN@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn