Re: [tsvwg] Review comments on a careful read of the L4S ID (27. Appx B & C)

Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com> Fri, 14 May 2021 17:32 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.h.duke@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 325B93A39F7 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 May 2021 10:32:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 AnYOAHbKLnr8 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 May 2021 10:32:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-il1-x136.google.com (mail-il1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::136]) (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 A82CC3A39FA for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 May 2021 10:32:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-il1-x136.google.com with SMTP id r5so426804ilb.2 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 May 2021 10:32:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=WuVtidxQ7hRdoB7cGI3JQDSTz14R7LLEPLQjGd70nIk=; b=ChfpZpsYmvgBdwZcPufyMYSLnERDV5MHGmgsb7NN10eiJwM2VOH4D9/0xlffBm03wp ppBhyE0vMPkoX8TC48eQCrbmYcu7JEgmJtmi5GNOqf1/JHykjcyV2PXydtmE3qk8wPwG dHp8xKRUV/rCNIXZM56TZnilcKkdKR2xnkaikhpaiV3yFx2nLAL1UalCVfFgqferLKGG vgF4ttluIDPjim+FUX2KenwXI4wZa15yRYKnmphpqrlwgF6IlKXA3hN3CS46MR2xDeaM 9GDtGHN6bjzib8nhSoQWoLGcArgFAV44ID1v91kv8KbPOVzZTdSnoczh8J3ocrhq3i7e veCQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=WuVtidxQ7hRdoB7cGI3JQDSTz14R7LLEPLQjGd70nIk=; b=rdGjf5i23MKZ3SkECkj2TuZV1ogm6Eo8pfNaxI/juaOhU4bTHaoQGNwCvpsoFAU459 HVT635S8gPYLTX3ne1/W9+XQW7auhJKcMGBDr/rcmPQpUGCZHDEZRUSA3VNC37rIY+cY eoKASTvkF0lao4hBDYMxm7oG8xgQENmZkAIEPDuWU7WJQ0jq9ROeBpSi/S9aluKp77rC 2Xd0d4sG9czW1IYU1TvORxJjfEqVmHfMwjJjzRWHCDpoIdd6jgwZOjBanb5HN/YrBKSO QQsIlPyvig6A93OUd01eUf0b+FDdEqUAm5kWev6quMjUQwGGZXU12NVJ1c8IgTzBaLCL NbBw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533DxCEtIsNkP5SW7LAwUKr+ztb/Fj9sPo05ozdmGrI11pTVtxN6 AhDhvmDQtxxerS4UAC3K2m34OHK1NR7okgUn2iKmmygJa0Y=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzbe/RXEAqn9gpGJZ6oXZdPoBgOYJ1tqwGB/wtYfmfSL0ojjzuB/fBJcNdrxT+cMqj+k09jmHCz8J4lFF1pArA=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:4c4:: with SMTP id f4mr41856509ils.272.1621013563501; Fri, 14 May 2021 10:32:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <634676ca-272d-d616-c352-b38446cf7aab@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <9d4a32be-0531-583b-5088-20227d703ac4@bobbriscoe.net> <eaa7e539-a9f0-567d-cf72-2977f934fc11@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <eaa7e539-a9f0-567d-cf72-2977f934fc11@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
From: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2021 10:32:32 -0700
Message-ID: <CAM4esxQkEw-X5O-_TpHA+SyyTPaWqwDfdjU+bJT5uJqRzH5v4Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Cc: Bob Briscoe <in@bobbriscoe.net>, "Black, David" <David.Black@dell.com>, Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a0f03a05c24da1db"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/g_hlruOHBd1-vpKOaC9ay4hihfk>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Review comments on a careful read of the L4S ID (27. Appx B & C)
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: Fri, 14 May 2021 17:32:49 -0000

SGTM

On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 8:46 AM Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
wrote:

> On 14/05/2021 16:09, Bob Briscoe wrote:
>
> Chairs, Martin,
> See [BB]
>
> ACK.
>
> That seems like a good plan, and was what we discussed.
>
> Gorry
>
> On 06/05/2021 07:52, Gorry Fairhurst wrote:
>
> =================================================================
>
> *27. Appendix B and C *
> ⁃            Appendix B is lengthy, at best loosely connected with the
> rest of the draft, definitely out of date, and not aligned with current WG
> views of this area. This appendix can be removed prior to publication.
> Appendix C is unecessary to the final publication.
>  =================================================================
>
>
> [BB] Offlist discussion with the chairs and Martin has come up with the
> solution of deleting the sub-sections of these appendices that are not
> referenced from the rest of the draft, but keeping those that are.
>
> B.1 is referenced from the body of the draft a couple of times, because
> it's the pros and cons of the chosen scheme.
> C.1 is referenced from the security considerations.
>
> So I'm planning on promoting B.1 to B, and C.1 to C.
> But I'll take out the remainder of B and C, and change the introductory
> context of each.
>
> For reference, here's the end of the ToC as it stands before the proposed
> edits:
>
>   Appendix B <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B>.  Alternative Identifiers  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  46 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-46>
>      B.1 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B.1>.  ECT(1) and CE codepoints  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  47 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-47>
>      B.2 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B.2>.  ECN-DualQ-SCE1  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  51 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-51>
>      B.3 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B.3>.  ECN-DualQ-SCE0  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  54 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-54>
>      B.4 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B.4>.  ECN Plus a Diffserv Codepoint (DSCP)  . . . . . . . . . .  56 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-56>
>      B.5 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B.5>.  ECN capability alone  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  58 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-58>
>      B.6 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B.6>.  Protocol ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  58 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-58>
>      B.7 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B.7>.  Source or destination addressing  . . . . . . . . . . . .  59 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-59>
>      B.8 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-B.8>.  Summary: Merits of Alternative Identifiers  . . . . . . .  59 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-59>
>    Appendix C <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-C>.  Potential Competing Uses for the ECT(1) Codepoint  .  60
>      C.1 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-C.1>.  Integrity of Congestion Feedback  . . . . . . . . . . . .  60 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-60>
>      C.2 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#appendix-C.2>.  Notification of Less Severe Congestion than CE  . . . . .  61 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id#page-61>
>
>
>
> Bob
>
> --
> ________________________________________________________________
> Bob Briscoe                               http://bobbriscoe.net/
>
>
>