IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] COMMENT PLEASE: Which DSCP value should we use for LE PHB?

Roland Bless <roland.bless@kit.edu> Sun, 09 July 2017 21:53 UTC

Return-Path: <roland.bless@kit.edu>
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 81059129B2C for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 14:53:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 uJBfpbSY9Xra for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 14:52:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from iramx2.ira.uni-karlsruhe.de (iramx2.ira.uni-karlsruhe.de [141.3.10.81]) (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 464F01242F5 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 14:52:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from i72vorta.tm.uni-karlsruhe.de ([141.3.71.26] helo=i72vorta.tm.kit.edu) by iramx2.ira.uni-karlsruhe.de with esmtp port 25 iface 141.3.10.81 id 1dUK8L-0003s3-Vy; Sun, 09 Jul 2017 23:52:54 +0200
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by i72vorta.tm.kit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACC2BB006A0; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 23:52:53 +0200 (CEST)
To: Tim Chown <Tim.Chown@jisc.ac.uk>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: "gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk" <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
References: <595F4D19.9030502@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <011e5fb5-6c83-bb38-e2cb-7fced2cb774a@kit.edu> <595F6F4F.20005@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <a97e114c-ca99-f0a3-76e6-784377a5fbe3@gmail.com> <C02205CB-7324-4C06-82CE-C8DA7D686F48@jisc.ac.uk> <74717821-30ae-203b-197b-2455cbf9d4a3@gmail.com> <66425AFB-A929-4A91-90F8-432F4FAE0520@jisc.ac.uk>
From: Roland Bless <roland.bless@kit.edu>
Organization: Institute of Telematics, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)
Message-ID: <daf2d2c4-8a64-7cb3-ac80-3a46903f58f0@kit.edu>
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2017 23:52:53 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.1) Gecko/20060111 Thunderbird/1.5 Mnenhy/0.7.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <66425AFB-A929-4A91-90F8-432F4FAE0520@jisc.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-ATIS-AV: ClamAV (iramx2.ira.uni-karlsruhe.de)
X-ATIS-Timestamp: iramx2.ira.uni-karlsruhe.de 1499637174.058880518
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/u6a356J6Sv7lHwY6oIghSQCjU-k>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] COMMENT PLEASE: Which DSCP value should we use for LE PHB?
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: Sun, 09 Jul 2017 21:53:01 -0000

Hi Tim,

On 09.07.2017 at 23:02 Tim Chown wrote:
> A bit moot now, but it would be interesting to know where the choice of DSCP 8 for LBE first originated - I guess from the QBSS work, but we copied it in the interests of interoperability across the NRENs in our TF-NGN experiments in early 2002.

It think the CS1 proposal came in via this draft here:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-diffserv-pdb-bh-00
I raised my concerns here:
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/diffserv/current/msg02013.html
Brian's reply was here:
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/diffserv/current/msg02014.html
So basically the IEEE 802.1q used PCP1 as Background class
and the idea was probably to do it similarly with the CS codepoints.

> Here’s a slide deck from Stanislav in 2001 - https://www.internet2.edu/presentations/CampusWorkshopAtlanta/Shalunov-QoS-Atlanta.pdf - but no mention of the CS1 conflict, or the reason to pick the value, just that 001000 was a “special global value”.  

Our first proposal (preceding QBSS)
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bless-diffserv-lbe-phb-00
used an experimental codepoint.

Regards,
 Roland

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email