IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] New Version Notification for draft-morton-taht-tsvwg-sce-00.txt

Dave Taht <dave@taht.net> Mon, 11 March 2019 23:33 UTC

Return-Path: <dave@taht.net>
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 DD37E124184 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 16:33:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 ivHsuYASzGV9 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 16:33:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.taht.net (mail.taht.net [176.58.107.8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F7B413122C for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 16:33:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dancer.taht.net (c-73-162-29-198.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [73.162.29.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.taht.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 330F82200A; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 23:33:21 +0000 (UTC)
From: Dave Taht <dave@taht.net>
To: Greg White <g.white@CableLabs.com>
Cc: Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
References: <155226671763.31131.7874324055612031095.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <87h8canrc6.fsf@taht.net> <75227bef-6757-26ea-9071-43265ceb9abe@bobbriscoe.net> <63DC5E45-449A-4008-9041-95A3C7216FF4@cablelabs.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 16:33:19 -0700
In-Reply-To: <63DC5E45-449A-4008-9041-95A3C7216FF4@cablelabs.com> (Greg White's message of "Mon, 11 Mar 2019 17:15:54 +0000")
Message-ID: <87h8c9m1fk.fsf@taht.net>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/mFMCKwL5ky0TPTjzqYGYDWS4nlo>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] New Version Notification for draft-morton-taht-tsvwg-sce-00.txt
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: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 23:33:27 -0000


Greg White <g.white@CableLabs.com> writes:

> On the item below, I am intending to finish up and submit a TSVWG
> informational draft today that describes the (new) mandatory support
> for L4S AQM and dual-queue requirement in DOCSIS 3.1 (CM & CMTS)
> equipment. The draft will essentially be a reformat of this document:
>
> https://cablela.bs/low-latency-docsis-technology-overview-february-2019
>
> These requirements were added in December, and will roll out as
> firmware updates to existing DOCSIS 3.1 equipment (nearly 100% of
> CMTSs, and a growing fraction of CMs) over time.

I was unaware of this notice, and as I note, it's only march...

Using up the last ECN bit in this way, for the sole benefit of the cable
industry, strikes me as a poor standard for the internet.

>
> -Greg
>
> From: tsvwg <tsvwg-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Bob Briscoe
> <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>
> Date: Monday, March 11, 2019 at 10:29 AM
> To: Dave Taht <dave@taht.net>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
> Cc: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [tsvwg] New Version Notification for
> draft-morton-taht-tsvwg-sce-00.txt
>
> L4S is far from dead. It's merely been working differently from how
> you're used to. Those working on an L4S AQM (at least those in the
> cable industry) had to have a private WG for the last ~18 months, but
> now we're allowed to publish and talk openly again.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email