Re: [TERNLI] Notes from tonight's ad hoc

Aaron Falk <falk@ISI.EDU> Wed, 02 August 2006 04:35 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G88Rn-0002Iz-1X; Wed, 02 Aug 2006 00:35:07 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G88Rl-0002Iq-SI for ternli@ietf.org; Wed, 02 Aug 2006 00:35:05 -0400
Received: from vapor.isi.edu ([128.9.64.64]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G88Rj-0002pE-Hl for ternli@ietf.org; Wed, 02 Aug 2006 00:35:05 -0400
Received: from [10.0.1.5] (static-71-246-51-26.lsanca.fios.verizon.net [71.246.51.26]) by vapor.isi.edu (8.11.6p2+0917/8.11.2) with ESMTP id k724XbY29068; Tue, 1 Aug 2006 21:33:37 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20060728114353.275FB444296@lawyers.icir.org>
References: <20060728114353.275FB444296@lawyers.icir.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Apple-Mail-6-92356629"
Message-Id: <847C30FB-FC4D-4412-8F54-785C9D038C57@isi.edu>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Aaron Falk <falk@ISI.EDU>
Subject: Re: [TERNLI] Notes from tonight's ad hoc
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 21:33:35 -0700
To: mallman@icir.org
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 1.1.2 (Tiger)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2)
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: falk@isi.edu
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 52e1467c2184c31006318542db5614d5
Cc: ternli@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ternli@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport-Enhancing Refinements to the Network Layer Interface <ternli.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ternli>, <mailto:ternli-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ternli>
List-Post: <mailto:ternli@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ternli-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ternli>, <mailto:ternli-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ternli-bounces@ietf.org

catching up...perhaps this point is made later in the thread...

On Jul 28, 2006, at 4:43 AM, Mark Allman wrote:

>  The real thing to get across is the available
> capacity has changed somewhat dramatically.

I think you only want to give *hints* when things have gotten  
*worse*.  Giving hints that things have gotten better may mislead a  
sender to thinking that they know where the bottleneck is, etc.  A  
hint that available capacity may be reduced may encourage a sender to  
reduce their rate to avoid a packet loss (or something).

--aaron