Re: [tsvwg] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-heist-tsvwg-ecn-deployment-observations-00.txt

Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net> Fri, 19 February 2021 20:43 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>
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 A15A03A14F9 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 12:43:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.433
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.433 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bobbriscoe.net
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 ziiFG5oNEcZS for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 12:43:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ssdrsserver2.hosting.co.uk (mail-ssdrsserver2.hosting.co.uk [185.185.84.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E4853A14F4 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 12:43:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bobbriscoe.net; s=default; h=Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=hvK4rfImFslT7JOpHTxICE8SdClSAfq9WGxYAZ0Andk=; b=WqSisForNtvmf4d1XA/QCUY4P n3V4BBxw+LyLBqHQ4k5gsmA7P614KmSp+CFwZfNfSsK2VbdWEuL/BAldl7MtYBWbEWdtijeDFtfS6 1MLB0FGT8+K1WljuklGP3+2JfCDT7jGSrIPzAUXRBTn4wUT7/AmOU5GcfgAyYw+ReZu9pD3Q/JzoL 8ErYLSm5B8T2ZmkE3HarTxhVBmyE25N9vitWpHrp2QhzFYMgx509TtuSbtuGn0M0OenLwvcjKzxed dpu/PlaLyKrLeGrUliRXeR9/FRNfNDawwuzlwUUMs45/Nu6VPxK0N4bXaqA+pu/6jELwpFoc4kG2/ 8EyviUnJQ==;
Received: from 67.153.238.178.in-addr.arpa ([178.238.153.67]:39400 helo=[192.168.1.11]) by ssdrsserver2.hosting.co.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>) id 1lDCcC-00067E-1f; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 20:43:04 +0000
To: Pete Heist <pete@heistp.net>
Cc: TSVWG <tsvwg@ietf.org>
References: <161366419040.16138.17111583810851995947@ietfa.amsl.com> <BF0810D9-E742-4FCB-90B1-6957551B585D@heistp.net> <b222bbdf-70ae-3e5b-b122-1160299fb4e2@bobbriscoe.net> <74394afa558cabf279445bbf5092383579c59481.camel@heistp.net>
From: Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>
Message-ID: <bcbd2126-d697-aa1f-17ac-f3e2c5669a8b@bobbriscoe.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 20:43:02 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <74394afa558cabf279445bbf5092383579c59481.camel@heistp.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------AE70F39E054F8F27A67F1FCD"
Content-Language: en-GB
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ssdrsserver2.hosting.co.uk
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - bobbriscoe.net
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: ssdrsserver2.hosting.co.uk: authenticated_id: in@bobbriscoe.net
X-Authenticated-Sender: ssdrsserver2.hosting.co.uk: in@bobbriscoe.net
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/E-z3llkcYBh4bREMbF2ZwVpuybA>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-heist-tsvwg-ecn-deployment-observations-00.txt
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, 19 Feb 2021 20:43:08 -0000

Thanks

On 19/02/2021 20:08, Pete Heist wrote:
> Hi Bob, I got a reply back from one admin that to his knowledge they 
> never used single queue AQMs in this environment. Jon summed up the 
> rest...
>
> Regards,
> Pete
>
> On Fri, 2021-02-19 at 12:50 +0000, Bob Briscoe wrote:
>> Pete,
>>
>> Thank you for this work.
>>
>> Given you have close contact with this ISP, have you asked, or could 
>> you ask them whether they have ever deployed any FIFO ECN-enabled 
>> AQMs themselves?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>> Bob
>>
>> On 18/02/2021 16:38, Pete Heist wrote:
>>
>>> A new version of I-D, draft-heist-tsvwg-ecn-deployment-observations-00.txt
>>> has been successfully submitted by Peter G. Heist and posted to the
>>> IETF repository.
>>>
>>> Name:		draft-heist-tsvwg-ecn-deployment-observations
>>> Revision:	00
>>> Title:		Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) Deployment Observations
>>> Document date:	2021-02-18
>>> Group:		Individual Submission
>>> Pages:		27
>>> URL:https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-heist-tsvwg-ecn-deployment-observations-00.txt
>>> Status:https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-heist-tsvwg-ecn-deployment-observations/
>>> Html:https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-heist-tsvwg-ecn-deployment-observations-00.html
>>> Htmlized:https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-heist-tsvwg-ecn-deployment-observations-00
>>>
>>> Abstract:
>>>    This note presents data gathered at an Internet Service Provider's
>>>    gateway on the observed deployment and usage of ECN.  Relevant IP
>>>    counter and flow tracking data was collected and analyzed for TCP and
>>>    other protocols.
>> This draft adds some data on the current usage of ECN. It was gathered over several weeks at a cooperative ISP with around 660 members, and looks at ECN endpoint activity, AQM deployment and ECN usage on non-TCP protocols. While this study is still relatively small, it’s hopefully at least a little more useful than the stateless counter data I posted late last year, which should set the bar suitably low…:)
>>
>> Pete
>>
>>
>

-- 
________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe                               http://bobbriscoe.net/