Re: [tsvwg] draft-ietf-tsvwg-nqb-15.txt - 5.1 Primary Requirements, classification

[[e-mail]]

Hi Greg,

[GW] As a mandatory requirement, I think DSCP is the only thing that is needed. I will change that sentence to:
" A node supporting the NQB PHB MUST support the ability to configure the DSCPs that are used to identify QB and NQB traffic of equivalent importance."

[RG] That means multiple DSCPs may be classified for NQB? I'm not sure whether it is necessary to have a statement, that many DSCPs are classified for default forwarding. The latter is a behaviour I'd expect if it is to be a default. Omitting the default part, the sentence you propose is also correct (by what it expresses) in the following way?
"A node supporting the NQB PHB MUST support the ability to configure classification of NQB DSCP and MAY (RG...SHOULD, if you prefer) additionally support the ability to configure classification of other DSCPs for the NQB PHB." (which I think is what most implementations support anyway, I think)

Please confirm or correct.

Regards,

Ruediger


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Greg White <[e-mail]> 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 7. Februar 2023 00:03
An: Geib, Rüdiger <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]
Betreff: Re: [tsvwg] draft-ietf-tsvwg-nqb-15.txt - 5.1 Primary Requirements, classification

Good catch.  See inline [GW].

On 2/3/23, 1:04 AM, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:


Hi Greg,


5.1. Primary Requirements


4th para:
A node supporting the NQB DSCP MUST support the ability to configure the classification criteria that are used to identify QB and NQB traffic of equivalent importance.


I'd think a node supporting the NQB _PHB_ MUST be able to classify NQB traffic? Or is this draft only about assigning a DSCP to some kind of traffic?

[GW] You are right.  It should say "PHB" not "DSCP".


Please further specify what is meant by "the classification criteria that are used to identify QB and NQB traffic of equivalent importance." - criteria is plural. I expect classification on the NQB DSCP. What are the other criteria?

[GW] As a mandatory requirement, I think DSCP is the only thing that is needed. I will change that sentence to:
" A node supporting the NQB PHB MUST support the ability to configure the DSCPs that are used to identify QB and NQB traffic of equivalent importance."





Regards,


Ruediger






-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: tsvwg <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> Im Auftrag von [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 12. Januar 2023 01:34
An: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
Betreff: [tsvwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tsvwg-nqb-15.txt




A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Transport Area Working Group WG of the IETF.


Title : A Non-Queue-Building Per-Hop Behavior (NQB PHB) for Differentiated Services Authors : Greg White Thomas Fossati Filename : draft-ietf-tsvwg-nqb-15.txt Pages : 25 Date : 2023-01-11


Abstract:
This document specifies properties and characteristics of a Non- Queue-Building Per-Hop Behavior (NQB PHB). The purpose of this NQB PHB is to provide a separate queue that enables smooth, low-data- rate, application-limited traffic flows, which would ordinarily share a queue with bursty and capacity-seeking traffic, to avoid the latency, latency variation and loss caused by such traffic. This PHB is implemented without prioritization and can be implemented without rate policing, making it suitable for environments where the use of these features is restricted. The NQB PHB has been developed primarily for use by access network segments, where queuing delays and queuing loss caused by Queue-Building protocols are manifested, but its use is not limited to such segments. In particular, applications to cable broadband links, Wi-Fi links, and mobile network radio and core segments are discussed. This document recommends a specific Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) to identify Non-Queue-Building flows.




The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-nqb/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-nqb/>


There is also an HTML version available at:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-tsvwg-nqb-15.html <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-tsvwg-nqb-15.html>


A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-tsvwg-nqb-15 <https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-tsvwg-nqb-15>




Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts