Re: [tsvwg] Review comments on a careful read of the L4S ID (#1: ABE)

[Michael Welzl <[e-mail]>]

> On May 14, 2021, at 12:21 PM, Bob Briscoe <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Michael,
> 
> On 14/05/2021 11:07, Michael Welzl wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> A comment below:
>> 
>>> On May 14, 2021, at 11:46 AM, Bob Briscoe <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> David, [Pls ignore previous email - had a better idea - see replacement text below]
>>> 
>>> A relevant place to refer to ABE is in S.1.3:
>>> 
>>> CURRENT:
>>>    This document is intended for experimental status, so it does not
>>>    update any standards track RFCs.  Therefore it depends on [RFC8311 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8311>],
>>>    which is a standards track specification that:
>>> 
>>>    o  updates the ECN proposed standard [RFC3168 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3168>] to allow experimental
>>>       track RFCs to relax the requirement that an ECN mark must be
>>>       equivalent to a drop (when the network applies markings and/or
>>>       when the sender responds to them);
>>> 
>>> PROPOSED to append:
>>>      For instance, an experimental ABE sender [RFC8511] responds less to ECN marks than to drops.
>>>      For instance, this permits an ABE sender [RFC8511] to experiment with responding less to ECN marks than to drops.
>> 
>> I disagree with “experiment with”. The specification is experimental, but this doesn’t entail that a sender would “experiment with responding less” - this sounds as if ABE would just specify that a reduced back-off is something cool to experiment with, and an ABE sender would then try this or that backoff, depending on their liking. That’s a misrepresentation.
>> 
>> Suggestion:
>>      For instance, this permits an ABE sender [RFC8511] to respond less to ECN marks than to drops.
>> 
>> I find it unnecessary to stress “experiment” again in this sentence because it describes an example of “updating the ECN proposed … to allow experimental track RFCs to … “ - i.e., it’s very clear from the context here that ABE is experimental.
> 
> [BB] I am being asked to stress the status of experimental drafts.
> I agree with your point about "experiment with" tho, so I'll take a middle line:
> 
>     in the ABE experiment [RFC8511] this permits a sender to respond less to ECN marks than to drops

This works for me. Thanks.

Cheers,
Michael