IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] New Version Notification for draft-morton-taht-tsvwg-sce-00.txt

Dave Taht <dave@taht.net> Mon, 11 March 2019 23:55 UTC

Return-Path: <dave@taht.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 D27B7131131 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 16:55:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.435
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.435 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS=3.335, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 MINRa8Mw2CFo for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 16:55:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.taht.net (mail.taht.net [IPv6:2a01:7e00::f03c:91ff:feae:7028]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93884129A87 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 16:55:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dancer.taht.net (c-73-162-29-198.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [73.162.29.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.taht.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 54C2A2200A; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 23:55:35 +0000 (UTC)
From: Dave Taht <dave@taht.net>
To: Greg White <g.white@CableLabs.com>
Cc: Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
References: <155226671763.31131.7874324055612031095.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <87h8canrc6.fsf@taht.net> <75227bef-6757-26ea-9071-43265ceb9abe@bobbriscoe.net> <63DC5E45-449A-4008-9041-95A3C7216FF4@cablelabs.com> <87h8c9m1fk.fsf@taht.net> <2CFCED24-68E9-4430-95FC-380E415D82B3@cablelabs.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 16:55:33 -0700
In-Reply-To: <2CFCED24-68E9-4430-95FC-380E415D82B3@cablelabs.com> (Greg White's message of "Mon, 11 Mar 2019 23:49:59 +0000")
Message-ID: <87bm2hm0ei.fsf@taht.net>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/_ILoKow7nDcl-s5Dw0mGxl6zRv8>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] New Version Notification for draft-morton-taht-tsvwg-sce-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: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 23:55:40 -0000

Greg White <g.white@CableLabs.com> writes:

> I'm not sure how you misinterpreted L4S as being "for the sole benefit
> of the cable industry".  It is a standards-track draft here at IETF.
> From what I understand, multiple network technologies are in the
> process of implementing it.  None have been public about it until now.

Publically, judging from the traffic on the ietf mailing lists, it
appeared to have died. It wasn't until January or so that activity
picked up. 

we were public about our separate wg when we formed it back in
august. The first output of that we just submitted as this draft,
and there is code and data landing for public review now.

Our charter is here: https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/ecn-sane/wiki/

We looked at a lot more things than just tcp along the way.


>
> -Greg
>
>
> On 3/11/19, 5:33 PM, "Dave Taht" <dave@taht.net> wrote:
>
>     
>     
>     Greg White <g.white@CableLabs.com> writes:
>     
>     > On the item below, I am intending to finish up and submit a TSVWG
>     > informational draft today that describes the (new) mandatory support
>     > for L4S AQM and dual-queue requirement in DOCSIS 3.1 (CM & CMTS)
>     > equipment. The draft will essentially be a reformat of this document:
>     >
>     > https://cablela.bs/low-latency-docsis-technology-overview-february-2019
>     >
>     > These requirements were added in December, and will roll out as
>     > firmware updates to existing DOCSIS 3.1 equipment (nearly 100% of
>     > CMTSs, and a growing fraction of CMs) over time.
>     
>     I was unaware of this notice, and as I note, it's only march...
>     
>     Using up the last ECN bit in this way, for the sole benefit of the cable
>     industry, strikes me as a poor standard for the internet.
>     
>     >
>     > -Greg
>     >
>     > From: tsvwg <tsvwg-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Bob Briscoe
>     > <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>
>     > Date: Monday, March 11, 2019 at 10:29 AM
>     > To: Dave Taht <dave@taht.net>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
>     > Cc: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
>     > Subject: Re: [tsvwg] New Version Notification for
>     > draft-morton-taht-tsvwg-sce-00.txt
>     >
>     > L4S is far from dead. It's merely been working differently from how
>     > you're used to. Those working on an L4S AQM (at least those in the
>     > cable industry) had to have a private WG for the last ~18 months, but
>     > now we're allowed to publish and talk openly again. 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email