IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] COMMENT PLEASE: Which DSCP value should we use for LE PHB?

Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 31 July 2017 17:00 UTC

Return-Path: <fredbaker.ietf@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 014321326B8 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:00:52 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 Kzm95CP8WfSK for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:00:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr0-x22b.google.com (mail-wr0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::22b]) (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 626EB1326B0 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:00:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id v105so151528753wrb.0 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:00:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Yi1Bh1z06DpGJVXIQI+XAHL56EncQYvJzyqTJB46sxk=; b=sC+2mL1rfwrceJivqaE+urwey1Vs1+9JK1LMqHqLrGLsQCPrVPEaET8GcVmYNYjtW4 BGCqobHBeOL8w5MAjew58irvF+MJRAJ6P4mZRC0MdXvgfLHNM5iISPGo28LYr/wFVGwE F1p0yLwmNB4itLpiY/iWtPE2n9vQugu6mnEGnDY/YNUZH58yshs7HQm0y/pM8uYx1zGg spCwGDYyoKkth9cFChqJQWPXKiaG3FQHYpMAGdqb+lv59xaO8v98YKR4E/ZywPxT4kEM fmQlQ8zseh75I+GysWYGkZBe23bti57dB1pglD8ULn4F+diMJbSegUDSL5chDKd1aVl/ ykcA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Yi1Bh1z06DpGJVXIQI+XAHL56EncQYvJzyqTJB46sxk=; b=Def/7I2ZDr7A9v3AutVfCU60mNoo3dZ5oi6jW3Ng2U9cHixTdlykvyA9TZAa6+4iYC nZLN8pbTxX25lWw4qyod0Z/ckwOfa/7fRAi/LrSxV/Tk+2cMVNayIA7MVhJcmCsqHzpU 8lOFmb55by9tg3jqL/vYLACnDsDLl0ew9WisG1L5rNSaTU2z5rkGrN6G1aDWBgxbHhG3 w4XOyTRu3cTbkgXdtVqm221R0RjejKq+p4K0OKtq821GOgKUxBbYZp85cK7ZQis9AK1m xmp9fZ+nKFicuBlb3lOJZVZkwWtrzJFAr+/M+OqZcdfPxFQvI2ZoJ3plQ58jD9SsLWXk Komg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw113swKq2FeustaObX2LfBlB2oNGSjtqu8VRWlRwHwPbVO8v+W6lM 6QXKZWEzTuAiPg==
X-Received: by 10.223.155.145 with SMTP id d17mr14975760wrc.193.1501520447975; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:00:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2600:8802:5600:1e::1701? ([2600:8802:5600:1e::1701]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d53sm34448561wrd.81.2017.07.31.10.00.45 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:00:47 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.0 \(3441.0.1\))
From: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <505f03a57bd4481b832bc22340c37316@HE105654.emea1.cds.t-internal.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:00:42 -0700
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, David.Black@dell.com, gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk, roland.bless@kit.edu, tsvwg@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <BCF1D707-549C-4F6A-B493-BB5CA24A3E1F@gmail.com>
References: <595F4D19.9030502@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <011e5fb5-6c83-bb38-e2cb-7fced2cb774a@kit.edu> <595F6F4F.20005@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <a97e114c-ca99-f0a3-76e6-784377a5fbe3@gmail.com> <C02205CB-7324-4C06-82CE-C8DA7D686F48@jisc.ac.uk> <74717821-30ae-203b-197b-2455cbf9d4a3@gmail.com> <66425AFB-A929-4A91-90F8-432F4FAE0520@jisc.ac.uk> <daf2d2c4-8a64-7cb3-ac80-3a46903f58f0@kit.edu> <b242faea-a3ca-6d5f-2eb3-85a9a08a6ea9@gmail.com> <59633402.9020907@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <d193232f-f28f-02a2-1171-53d6f0d4bf7b@gmail.com> <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D243277949362FB76819@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com> <50f4b157-425e-a2cc-a924-5dd02345adef@gmail.com> <505f03a57bd4481b832bc22340c37316@HE105654.emea1.cds.t-internal.com>
To: Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3441.0.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/OJx-lgXF3oxVqGbI-J7J7s3izd8>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] COMMENT PLEASE: Which DSCP value should we use for LE PHB?
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 17:00:52 -0000


> On Jul 31, 2017, at 6:34 AM, Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de wrote:
> 
> DSCP 000001 might be an option. No other IETF recommended DSCP is re-marked to this one. It is to some extent RFC4594 compatible and RFC8100 could cope with it if default transport is applied. 

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2474#section-6 indicates that 000001 is experimental/local use, available for standards allocation only as necessary. Pool 1 is 32 code points, of which I believe 20 are in use (figure 3 of RFC 4594). I'd rather not dip into pool 3 unnecessarily. Is there another option?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email