Re: [tsvwg] residential broadband BCP PHB and CP treatment Re: CC/bleaching thoughts for draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb-04

[Mikael Abrahamsson <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, 20 Apr 2018, [e-mail] wrote:

> Mikael, by "residential broadband" you mean the consumer edge device or the home gateway - a piece of equipment which today isn't located within provider premises?
>
> The direction of traffic at the residential broadband gateway is "to the Internet" and congestion is caused by sources within the home network. All of that is BYOD equipment (in some countries including the residential broadband gateway).
>
> Should that be correct, I support your idea of giving LE queuing guidance to the residential broadband gateway vendors.
>
> If your proposal is meant to cover other pieces of equipment, like Broadband Network Gateways, please clarify.

This guidance is for CP handling/mapping ingress on BNG and on peering 
routers (ISP edge), and CP based PHB ingress/egress customer-facing for 
both BNG, HGW and all other equipment handling last-hop-to-customer 
traffic and intra-customer network for BYOD non-managed networks (such as 
a residential network).

So some examples:

What should the PHB be egress on BNG -> customer

What should the CP treatment be ingress on BNG (because HGW is customer 
controlled potentially).

If BNG is doing ingress shaping for instance, what should this PHB be 
(again, customer-controlled HGW).

What is the CP treatment between ISPs when nothing is discussed regarding 
CP treatment (Internet peering default). What should ISP ingress settings 
be towards an IX LAN for instance.

What is the CP based egress PHB towards an IX.

All of this is for Internet traffic, think cat pictures, online gaming, 
OTT streaming services etc. Generic Internet traffic.

In my solution my "BNG" does ingress and egress shaping, and that's what I 
have used so far in my examples. I don't consider the HGW a trusted 
device (it often is, but not all the time).

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: [e-mail]