[tsvwg] Fwd: TSVWG: WGLC reviews of ECN encapsulation drafts

Andrew McGregor <andrewmcgr@gmail.com> Wed, 15 May 2019 03:32 UTC

Return-Path: <andrewmcgr@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 265F7120260 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 May 2019 20:32:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QhGz84QyhQmj for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 May 2019 20:32:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ua1-x92a.google.com (mail-ua1-x92a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::92a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3B6F1200EC for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 May 2019 20:32:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ua1-x92a.google.com with SMTP id e9so465573uar.9 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 May 2019 20:32:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=qNC62bgAYCWGaO5J7dTSWxbfTW1YjuKIhkCVGvoiFj0=; b=YRybHtRXWZcugZLDkgqEYjZGHu5tb3yPD2z9S39BX7Qw76KvVDN7hHjO3FPGvgEPFm mYjM7uEhx6r3JH0YjAWgGWfqG6yrogMo84k+GW7fAmr5ZrrTxnO+zwFJ3RmybKVBtM1k v/Sy4kfVHjob25bMUWw+P3JYrwPw70N5F0JnmRCrCMYbHsOx9Bpt88cT35M00jzrZPZ0 1ZzLNyiV27sYEpGR3qqXZky2m9gaSvunRnJQI4aN4psab8UbP2Gf1XYtiZ8yVwYcjiXo Pgj2mXIzSE3gfH9+qezACX4824Eiu/HBKn52e7E7bVDZGzIrQePAnh39FDVLIT+HQzSo bn2A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=qNC62bgAYCWGaO5J7dTSWxbfTW1YjuKIhkCVGvoiFj0=; b=fCb5E7I4f+pEB+TSTkOdSHlXvoXD3T7XHGbclr/y0zRGd3vU9G1hwuDhpWMEzarSpw 06luep+DFtnYxO5EmMt3FCXQAfpMqCmYdaXnDSDNQrnTPYKti1hht9PC4Ur7d3um0ofn S/Yyi2jSErHewbYeDCMk5lDh0oKXG1hsGM0aiz+GuomRHr6E0X6oYttwSOqhxd5jPp8K 1uLrATEemI3PKeF4c5ze5uAZCFn/+Rt5SUI1//+ISbcSAQy0dLzwWHLtpoemE9tL5bmB A6C12ZThNcpSUfNLyncCpRrGtce27XGCcGNo5C8RqxWZvjRL+6TAQbTMxxTbsjf4nvgT cy1g==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX+U4WVHu4wYYqI18kZhPzQzF+Lr/vNVeUncImcP7cIqNHOujPK /sxXjKiwvt0rQzA91xqor516+asIw+4cdustB0weMene
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyucsWzX0oR0ylG23vZT0EghvRWGZhTcYYPqaZM9BbkUt3RuZzkS0ItZ/HcE4peQhy4hmH5yb0k0eRZWDvSPdc=
X-Received: by 2002:ab0:2845:: with SMTP id c5mr15795564uaq.61.1557891158351; Tue, 14 May 2019 20:32:38 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D24327794936303A5167@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com> <CAA_e5Z7P33gbUdaAoT96ZNNJEZ51zOsQ2XuHWwenzLtVnek36g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAA_e5Z7P33gbUdaAoT96ZNNJEZ51zOsQ2XuHWwenzLtVnek36g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andrew McGregor <andrewmcgr@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 13:32:27 +1000
Message-ID: <CAA_e5Z4=vbs2Zr618htDfTYk5bZxqKeA6YS923dP9rG41926pA@mail.gmail.com>
To: tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000017a5d80588e4cd00"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/BmygZ71oEWp3weRq1pW7Vnl3KDM>
Subject: [tsvwg] Fwd: TSVWG: WGLC reviews of ECN encapsulation drafts
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 11:09:23 -0000

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Andrew McGregor <andrewmcgr@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, May 10, 2019 at 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: TSVWG: WGLC reviews of ECN encapsulation drafts
To: Black, David <David.Black@dell.com>, <
draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines@ietf.org>
Cc: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>, Scheffenegger, Richard <
Richard.Scheffenegger@netapp.com>, Brian Trammell (trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch)
<trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch>, Black, David <David.Black@dell.com>, Wesley Eddy
<wes@mti-systems.com>


Hi all,

I have reviewed draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines.

I find only one issue of any substance. That is, the definition of a PDU
and the discussion on reframing and congestion marking in section 4.6 seems
to me to apply more to fragmenting MACs like ATM than to aggregating MACs
like LTE, WiFi, and DOCSIS. Particularly, if an aggregated PDU is
congestion marked in total, is it correct to mark all the contained IP
frames? What if, like WiFi, the lower layer supports non-congestive drops
for single PDUs within an MPDU, and could conceivably also support
congestion marking separately? One could imagine defining congestion in
terms of airtime rather than octets for wireless MACs, for example.

Nits:
"doesn't" seems to be used frequently, which doesn't seem appropriate in
every case.

"feed-up-an-forward" typo in the second-last paragraph of the conclusion.

Hope this helps,
Andrew

On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 11:31 AM Black, David <David.Black@dell.com> wrote:

> Gentlemen (Gorry, Richard, Brian and Andrew):
>
>
>
> Once upon a time (this past summer in Montreal), I believe that each of
> you volunteered to review the two ECN encapsulation drafts during a Working
> Group Last Call (WGLC):
>
>                 - draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines/>
>
>                 - draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc6040update-shim
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc6040update-shim/>
>
> I subsequently dropped the ball on this :-(.
>
>
>
> I’m now planning to start a combined WGLC on these two drafts sometime in
> January.   Would each of you please let me know:
>
>                 - Whether you’re still able to and interested in reviewing
> these drafts during WGLC, and
>
>                 - Any time preferences or restrictions on when to do the
> review, so that I can schedule the WGLC appropriately.
>
> I have no problem with a longer-than-usual WGLC time period to enable
> reviews from talented folks such as you.
>
>
>
> Thanks, --David
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> David L. Black, Senior Distinguished Engineer
>
> Dell EMC, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
>
> +1 (774) 350-9323 *New *   Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
>
> David.Black@dell.com
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>