Re: [tsvwg] Review comments on a careful read of the L4S ID (27. Appx B & C)

Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Fri, 14 May 2021 15:46 UTC

Return-Path: <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
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 7A7323A36EA for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 May 2021 08:46:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 1dgkzKOItFPO for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 May 2021 08:46:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk (pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:42:150::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD2C23A36E9 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 May 2021 08:46:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from GF-MBP-2.lan (fgrpf.plus.com [212.159.18.54]) by pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1C0401B00064; Fri, 14 May 2021 16:46:21 +0100 (BST)
To: Bob Briscoe <in@bobbriscoe.net>, "Black, David" <David.Black@dell.com>, Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>, Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
Cc: "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
References: <634676ca-272d-d616-c352-b38446cf7aab@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <9d4a32be-0531-583b-5088-20227d703ac4@bobbriscoe.net>
From: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <eaa7e539-a9f0-567d-cf72-2977f934fc11@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2021 16:46:19 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <9d4a32be-0531-583b-5088-20227d703ac4@bobbriscoe.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------4DCB9875EB6094DA9300177E"
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/DluENJjO7OUMDyyxv53mtiS41lg>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Review comments on a careful read of the L4S ID (27. Appx B & C)
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: Fri, 14 May 2021 15:46:34 -0000

On 14/05/2021 16:09, Bob Briscoe wrote:
> Chairs, Martin,
> See [BB]
>
ACK.

That seems like a good plan, and was what we discussed.

Gorry

> On 06/05/2021 07:52, Gorry Fairhurst wrote:
>>
>> =================================================================
>> *27. Appendix B and C
>> *
>> ⁃Appendix B is lengthy, at best loosely connected with the rest of 
>> the draft, definitely out of date, and not aligned with current WG 
>> views of this area. This appendix can be removed prior to 
>> publication. Appendix C is unecessary to the final publication.
>> =================================================================
>
> [BB] Offlist discussion with the chairs and Martin has come up with 
> the solution of deleting the sub-sections of these appendices that are 
> not referenced from the rest of the draft, but keeping those that are.
>
> B.1 is referenced from the body of the draft a couple of times, 
> because it's the pros and cons of the chosen scheme.
> C.1 is referenced from the security considerations.
>
> So I'm planning on promoting B.1 to B, and C.1 to C.
> But I'll take out the remainder of B and C, and change the 
> introductory context of each.
>
> For reference, here's the end of the ToC as it stands before the 
> proposed edits:
>
>    Appendix B  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B>.  Alternative Identifiers  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-46>
>       B.1  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B.1>.  ECT(1) and CE codepoints  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-47>
>       B.2  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B.2>.  ECN-DualQ-SCE1  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-51>
>       B.3  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B.3>.  ECN-DualQ-SCE0  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-54>
>       B.4  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B.4>.  ECN Plus a Diffserv Codepoint (DSCP)  . . . . . . . . . .56  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-56>
>       B.5  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B.5>.  ECN capability alone  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-58>
>       B.6  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B.6>.  Protocol ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-58>
>       B.7  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B.7>.  Source or destination addressing  . . . . . . . . . . . .59  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-59>
>       B.8  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B.8>.  Summary: Merits of Alternative Identifiers  . . . . . . .59  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-59>
>     Appendix C  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-C>.  Potential Competing Uses for the ECT(1) Codepoint  .  60
>       C.1  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-C.1>.  Integrity of Congestion Feedback  . . . . . . . . . . . .60  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-60>
>       C.2  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-C.2>.  Notification of Less Severe Congestion than CE  . . . . .61  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-61>
>
>
> Bob
>
> -- 
> ________________________________________________________________
> Bob Briscoehttp://bobbriscoe.net/