Return-Path: 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 1A4E43A084F; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:31:13 -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 eQRwt0ICqjaM; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:31:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qt1-x836.google.com (mail-qt1-x836.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::836]) (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 577EA3A0820; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:31:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt1-x836.google.com with SMTP id g16so2770104qtp.9; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:31:10 -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=T8a/xljH8SOxHcecTxELcbW5CSkp8MUbCK0uf6IgFMc=; b=VIY8PWmo9tVuSfpOhisryqsETmM2m6x21JAeeqh42Jyv6iZ+ta65N/3qrN7bsxVsfz VtSf67/+eoZMUKV7x3IUjeLY0LqPtOeT2zQ+M/fOXl5Tnw5CjT9IMG0R8mUb+XT4SzX5 nsUTG9GT39UDB/KnomIr9LzzeTWg4x32dMag6a7iW/M85haqp4vXCZ/nkCTBk6haBoMQ 5ciA4S7KZqhYzPgN/4EJOBGrt+HyThooRr6umsb03UVZsXiZhO5CKFobGyQhJRqxfkbI JL6YKy/YokJOaKpytmQtQFUe7IdPWvsYLh/UrqVhfY1Myj5yMWh2zd4IjUwxqg3/VcaC LdJQ== 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=T8a/xljH8SOxHcecTxELcbW5CSkp8MUbCK0uf6IgFMc=; b=rRc0OgHRHuQLw00tr1gATtbO1ZyK7N8pXfJLomX/7YKd1PoEW7iubWdc+HNFj5Dp2Q y6q/a8AqsmToLz+ZjgjduzKBAvFTfvCnbSznka9Saeo+0pZ3c0TzD+TI6hWDLYmJx1+6 tSKEbCGx3f4FrU45DTtu8MxcX2Emmwk8HgezE0WfdzNAt7TAjywX4IXt+NWtTlgQ972v +/agER4cE/8E2uD31cgBqmzHCmphhQL7t7rLK/MdxDrpMzps2TpWAyWHQzL+VXuxY1/L rWtNRLxrABKCTEYKL5Ziik5uK8gQOqX4Bry75AzshZcGMCr5uur5baz5zrr+Tmvy66O8 4dCQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ3kNW3vOMcfclFXdHabbn2MJnEPBnIq4M1dnIsgeMAcXrvICo8v +AgrzmpEcxU+tyZIseoQ3Jv5H8gy+yCSqZdB9XYl1Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: =?utf-8?q?ADFU+vuD0kIeP8WxrRnUAHwELS2nClic2oXMPAUi45Si?= =?utf-8?q?56tcYQAHmo2YgetG94cLiooW8YCKMwDFg6wg9fu1LkUgsBg=3D?= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4d09:: with SMTP id w9mr13427544qtv.279.1583865068969; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:31:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <155839199921.12894.1422942310166180969@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: From: "Andrew G. Malis" Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:30:58 -0400 Message-ID: To: Bob Briscoe Cc: draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines@ietf.org, tsvwg IETF list Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000cee32505a08452a1" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [tsvwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines-13.txt X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Transport Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 18:31:20 -0000 --000000000000cee32505a08452a1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Bob, Pretty funny having this suddenly pop up - I had to refresh my memory cache for the context. Cheers, Andy On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 1:57 PM Bob Briscoe wrote: > Andy, > > Just found this email. Apologies... > > On 21/05/2019 15:51, Andrew G. Malis wrote: > > Bob, John, Pat, > > In your draft, I noticed that you reference RFC 5129 but not 5462. A > reference to 5462 would be useful, as it updates 5129. > > > My understanding is that we should cite the relevant RFC, then any updates > to that RFC automatically apply. > > I am aware of RFC5462, and I know you're only trying to be helpful, but I > figured the /relevant/ RFC in this case was RFC5129, which defines ECN > marking in MPLS. > Given RFC5462 is not the technical definition of ECN marking in MPLS, but > solely gives the EXP field a new name, I don't think it's necessary to cite > it. Particularly as there is no mention of the field name (old or new) in > the ecn-encap draft. > > Despite the length of ecn-encap, I do try to be parsimonious. > > But thanks anyway for taking the care to highlight this. > > > > Bob > > > > Cheers, > Andy > > > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 6:40 PM wrote: > >> >> 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 : Guidelines for Adding Congestion Notification >> to Protocols that Encapsulate IP >> Authors : Bob Briscoe >> John Kaippallimalil >> Pat Thaler >> Filename : draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines-13.txt >> Pages : 38 >> Date : 2019-05-20 >> >> Abstract: >> The purpose of this document is to guide the design of congestion >> notification in any lower layer or tunnelling protocol that >> encapsulates IP. The aim is for explicit congestion signals to >> propagate consistently from lower layer protocols into IP. Then the >> IP internetwork layer can act as a portability layer to carry >> congestion notification from non-IP-aware congested nodes up to the >> transport layer (L4). Following these guidelines should assure >> interworking among IP layer and lower layer congestion notification >> mechanisms, whether specified by the IETF or other standards bodies. >> This document updates the advice to subnetwork designers about ECN in >> RFC 3819. >> >> >> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines/ >> >> There are also htmlized versions available at: >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines-13 >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines-13 >> >> A diff from the previous version is available at: >> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines-13 >> >> >> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >> submission >> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> I-D-Announce mailing list >> I-D-Announce@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html >> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >> > > -- > ________________________________________________________________ > Bob Briscoe http://bobbriscoe.net/ > > --000000000000cee32505a08452a1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Bob,

Pretty funny having this suddenly= =C2=A0pop up - I had to refresh my memory cache for the context.
=
Cheers,
Andy


On Tue, Mar 10, 2= 020 at 1:57 PM Bob Briscoe <in@bobb= riscoe.net> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
Andy,

Just found this email. Apologies...

On 21/05/2019 15:51, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
=20
Bob, John, Pat,

In your draft, I noticed that you reference RFC 5129 but not 5462. A reference to 5462 would be useful, as it updates 5129.

My understanding is that we should cite the relevant RFC, then any updates to that RFC automatically apply.

I am aware of RFC5462, and I know you're only trying to be helpful, but I figured the /relevant/ RFC in this case was RFC5129, which defines ECN marking in MPLS.
Given RFC5462 is not the technical definition of ECN marking in MPLS, but solely gives the EXP field a new name, I don't think it&#= 39;s necessary to cite it. Particularly as there is no mention of the field name (old or new) in the ecn-encap draft.

Despite the length of ecn-encap, I do try to be parsimonious.

But thanks anyway for taking the care to highlight this.



Bob



Cheers,
Andy


On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 6:40 PM <internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:

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.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Title=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0: Guidelines for Adding Congestion Notification to Protocols that Encapsulate IP
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Authors=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0: Bob Briscoe
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 John Kaippallimalil
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Pat Thaler
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Filename=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines-13.txt
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Pages=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0: 38
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Date=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 : 2019-05-20

Abstract:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0The purpose of this document is to guide the design = of congestion
=C2=A0 =C2=A0notification in any lower layer or tunnelling protoc= ol that
=C2=A0 =C2=A0encapsulates IP.=C2=A0 The aim is for explicit conge= stion signals to
=C2=A0 =C2=A0propagate consistently from lower layer protocols in= to IP.=C2=A0 Then the
=C2=A0 =C2=A0IP internetwork layer can act as a portability layer= to carry
=C2=A0 =C2=A0congestion notification from non-IP-aware congested = nodes up to the
=C2=A0 =C2=A0transport layer (L4).=C2=A0 Following these guidelin= es should assure
=C2=A0 =C2=A0interworking among IP layer and lower layer congesti= on notification
=C2=A0 =C2=A0mechanisms, whether specified by the IETF or other standards bodies.
=C2=A0 =C2=A0This document updates the advice to subnetwork desig= ners about ECN in
=C2=A0 =C2=A0RFC 3819.


The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker= .ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines/

There are also htmlized versions available at:
https://tools.ietf.org= /html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines-13
https://data= tracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines-13

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ie= tf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines-13


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing list
I-D-An= nounce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-= d-announce
Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html=
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt<= br> 

--=20
________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe                               http://bobbriscoe.net/
--000000000000cee32505a08452a1--