IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] CC/bleaching thoughts for draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb-04

<Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de> Thu, 12 April 2018 06:59 UTC

Return-Path: <Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de>
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 5C907126B6E; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 23:59:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=telekom.de header.b=fK7SRdLi; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=telekom.onmicrosoft.de header.b=Jiuj6KIp
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 RZ5S_D60U215; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 23:59:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout34.telekom.de (MAILOUT34.telekom.de [194.25.225.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B45D1241FC; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 23:59:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telekom.de; i=@telekom.de; q=dns/txt; s=dtag1; t=1523516360; x=1555052360; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=YUIJB4jfCraHqYBsgmIWhky3dsyur8WnD6hHrIu5aeA=; b=fK7SRdLiUgkfINsd8salMuNW0hrc4C1mRq5h2ZvIxtS44Eo3QKG+3Ovp PD/Gnfeyh50apBuHr0L5Q/96VKIUWYuz1dxuwFeP+0iMtjUjLm4SASCRX ziKCNosTZ/SUES1KLGqYk2kqZinAS/PjOy3h42WTQ8cuBh/dPRe1Ehump ca7WSDWK8tPMTFGAI+Zgcaaga2zrpgL8E+kR4SpCEOWbI1FeuQxkEfAZU /NPeSS7c06O9Hmd90LE+otYDQ+LBg2jy6gOa/b6Nd0UuVjNb7DZfy4CyO adnnFYb6XYtSmFlN2IUq77rmV4laSh7k1pY+S0yALRRXWnjk4N+wZP8er Q==;
Received: from qde8e4.de.t-internal.com ([10.171.255.33]) by MAILOUT31.dmznet.de.t-internal.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Apr 2018 08:56:04 +0200
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.48,405,1517871600"; d="scan'208";a="218014565"
Received: from he105824.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.169.118.46]) by QDE8PP.de.t-internal.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 12 Apr 2018 08:56:04 +0200
Received: from HE105780.EMEA1.cds.t-internal.com (10.169.118.26) by HE105824.emea1.cds.t-internal.com (10.169.118.46) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1365.1; Thu, 12 Apr 2018 08:56:04 +0200
Received: from HE106564.emea1.cds.t-internal.com (10.171.40.16) by HE105780.EMEA1.cds.t-internal.com (10.169.118.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1365.1 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 12 Apr 2018 08:56:04 +0200
Received: from GER01-FRA-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.de (51.4.80.21) by O365mail01.telekom.de (172.30.0.234) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1365.1; Thu, 12 Apr 2018 08:55:27 +0200
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telekom.onmicrosoft.de; s=selector1-telekom-onmicrosoft-de; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=YUIJB4jfCraHqYBsgmIWhky3dsyur8WnD6hHrIu5aeA=; b=Jiuj6KIp6dkvSLhtl6SCP6miNFdDQCth5jGQmRV6Sf3nSmMS0VU1AiWApeoEm47w11A9BVymW5kaKPB/TETjXuTAwtNMFTNt87g6/QfRLo3LROt80jy2uRZUj0OX3unITN/yCLJGQDsTV7xuT+bKsvAlotDNPVSOFUno5M5aDns=
Received: from LEJPR01MB1033.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE (10.158.147.8) by LEJPR01MB1034.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE (10.158.147.9) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P256) id 15.20.653.11; Thu, 12 Apr 2018 06:56:03 +0000
Received: from LEJPR01MB1033.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE ([fe80::608d:dfcb:f6c3:8f9]) by LEJPR01MB1033.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE ([fe80::608d:dfcb:f6c3:8f9%14]) with mapi id 15.20.0675.012; Thu, 12 Apr 2018 06:56:03 +0000
From: Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de
To: tte@cs.fau.de
CC: tsvwg@ietf.org, draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb@ietf.org, brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com
Thread-Topic: [tsvwg] CC/bleaching thoughts for draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb-04
Thread-Index: AQHT0ESmrbZzf5Uw4kWzFNq4GDR4+aP5tDqAgADvDYCAAclbgIAAQxLQ
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 06:56:03 +0000
Message-ID: <LEJPR01MB10334C794BDA7E125917576E9CBC0@LEJPR01MB1033.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE>
References: <20180406160344.xwfqgzhzfto56jhq@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <LEJPR01MB1033F43509F08701B2B5EA1D9CBF0@LEJPR01MB1033.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE> <82d646b7-d475-64d6-9f0b-f75e3daeeaca@gmail.com> <20180410090033.xkwsyfbfardg4pwx@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <ddac784e-3a88-c82d-0ed5-3816bffa2d72@gmail.com> <20180412023305.6nwyoway2m2exy2c@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
In-Reply-To: <20180412023305.6nwyoway2m2exy2c@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: de-DE
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de;
x-originating-ip: [164.19.3.45]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; LEJPR01MB1034; 7:G9ojue10OYnGFEfEOHeHN8TCDW5nuS17hZ7+mjf1adp6SEb/AFfhZ5+pV4Rt+N+8h+ZTg/fr7S/9j7G0wS0vWOvAIaS+GPPHHvwxZp+wzkp/uVWCjnyG9vinxdzqu8aPc+UdRJy5UenP+zvHawS/Fl9GhiekifamqZM3efyLHWv/X2c2h/bOztZrz3V51qxHRBVIyLf+Z2x769aqWMRTIzPp0klI7AQ5r/zeI34m9dyftBsgOLAQJOM4puNw7Ty/
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SOS;
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652020)(5600026)(4534165)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:LEJPR01MB1034;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: LEJPR01MB1034:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <LEJPR01MB1034F55F550A883E7FABB6F59CBC0@LEJPR01MB1034.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040522)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(93006095)(93001095)(10201501046)(3231221)(944501327)(52105095)(3002001)(6041310)(20161123562045)(20161123558120)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123564045)(20161123560045)(6072148)(201708071742011); SRVR:LEJPR01MB1034; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:LEJPR01MB1034;
x-forefront-prvs: 06400060E1
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(39860400002)(39380400002)(376002)(346002)(366004)(396003)(189003)(199004)(81156014)(14454004)(8676002)(2906002)(106356001)(7736002)(305945005)(54906003)(6916009)(97736004)(3280700002)(478600001)(68736007)(33656002)(5660300001)(3660700001)(6116002)(26005)(186003)(75402003)(52396003)(4326008)(2900100001)(3846002)(74482002)(55016002)(76176011)(86362001)(5250100002)(53936002)(8936002)(93886005)(105586002)(39060400002)(9686003)(72206003)(316002)(476003)(102836004)(486006)(7696005)(66066001)(11346002)(446003)(81166006); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:LEJPR01MB1034; H:LEJPR01MB1033.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: telekom.de does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: SGDqVTR9lIj2svArptb1WKVdIHn348jsWorM2Q2X4ZG6FButi9gY7Rr+GFeF9E46VKhLEaCtSXWrG3brFwfatIjWH8absn0SHiSRyLZXsVbYCWlxe+Pj3JrKNM+WUOvO6Umw3sQG8EpjF3e6UHD81AhBaMOyX82R89wg+wChRkiR2NTprn38kV+cXA82Dtoi
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 3dc556f9-3bfb-4b8a-230e-08d5a04274f4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 3dc556f9-3bfb-4b8a-230e-08d5a04274f4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 12 Apr 2018 06:56:03.2298 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bde4dffc-4b60-4cf6-8b04-a5eeb25f5c4f
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: LEJPR01MB1034
X-OriginatorOrg: telekom.de
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/neZAYKx68warDL5X9Bn4ihUr4Hk>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] CC/bleaching thoughts for draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb-04
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 06:59:23 -0000

Hi Toerless,

My comments marked [RG]...

Regards, Ruediger

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Toerless Eckert [mailto:tte@cs.fau.de] 

On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 11:16:09AM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

.............
> The real question is whether rtcweb deployment encourages deployment 
> of RFC8100 style mappings. I'm pessimistic.

Forget interdomain issues. The question is whether anyone can propose a useful QoS setup for draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos even within an enterprise leveraging the three priorities. If there is a good recipe to operationalize this in an enterprise, we can look at figuring out if/how to use the same recipe in L3VPN. I am quite pessimistic about the three priority model.

I think its not even clear what the desirable behavior under contention across those priorities is. I think the goal was just to provide nerd-knob heaven, aka: make RTCweb apps configurable so one could start experimenting in enterprises with priorities and DSCP and see what QoS setup might make sense. Which is not a bad idea. Its just not a complete solution, so i would not dare to recommend anything to SPs for this today.

[RG] I'm not sure whether I understand you. Do you say, the DSCPs of draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos are by and large reserved to distinguish 3 priorities? I must admit that my interest in drafts reserving a multitude of DSCPs for unclear purposes is limited. I believe in aggregated scheduling. Deploy separate classes, if this proves to be of advantage ("prove", not "believe"). Someone has to configure and operate all this scheduling, and sometimes debugging is required. If something is new, a basic standard set which is expandable to me is more favorable, than a flexible (aka complex) toolset.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email