Re: [tsvwg] TSVWG: Quick drive-by note on well-known TSVWG TLAs

[Gorry Fairhurst <[e-mail]>]

On 10/02/2023 02:42, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> I just wanted to leave a quick drive by note, maybe someone would like to take care of it.
>
> How can it be that an abbreviation as fundamental as DSCP is not listed
> as well-known inhttps://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt  ?
>
> Of course, i am writing this complaint because i needed to check whether i had
> to expand DSCP on first use in some draft i am writing, and alas, i have to, and i think it
> sucks. Just check out on that URL what crazy historic and now irrelevant TLAs do have that
> well-known (*) gold status.
>
> So if anyone (WG chairs, Bueller) would like to talk to RFC editor about
> this,  o get core well-known TSVWG abbreviations be given that (*), i would highly appreciate.
>
> Of course, maybe there are more core TSVWG abbreviations that could be upgraded to gold status with RFC editor.
> I would recommend at least also EF and BE.
>
> (*) btw. does not mean that authors are prohibit to expand on first use, but they're free to do so.
> IMHO it primarily gives recognition to core teminology of the IETF (but thats of course my personal interpretation.
>
> Thanks a lot
>       Toerless

Thanks Toerless,


I'd suggest these are added

     DSCP - Differentiated Services Code Point

     EF - Expedited Forwarding (as in "Diffserv EF")

     CS - Class Selector (as in "Diffserv CS")

     LE - Lower Effort (as in "Diffserv LE")

Can we ask to mark this as depecated!

    TOS        - Type of Service (TOS)

---

I note that the following related items are already there:

     AF - Assured Forwarding (as in "Diffserv AF")
     BE         - best-effort (BE)
     PHB        - Per-Hop Behavior (PHB)

---

Let me know if anyone has comments, and I'll take the action to talk to RFC-Ed, we have a WG document with our
AD at the moment that is all about DSCPs :-), so now is a good time!

Gorry Fairhurst