Subject: [aqm] draft BoF agenda

From: Wesley Eddy <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 00:42:25 -0400

Richard and I have come up with the draft agenda below for the
AQM BoF in Berlin.  Some presentations are still being confirmed.
If you have any significant thoughts about this, we'll be happy
to hear them.

Background (chairs) - 5 min (1700 - 1705)
  (introduce the BoF and give a brief summary of AQM discussion
   in TSVAREA at last IETF
   draft charter will be posted to mailing list, and we will
   assume people are roughly familiar with it)

Recommendations (Fred Baker) - 10 min (1705 - 1715)
  (talk about the state of the document and what it's trying to
   do in terms of updating 2309 and adding lessons learned)
  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-baker-aqm-recommendation

Example Algorithms For Consideration - 30 min (1715 - 1745)
  PIE (speaker TBD) - 10 min
    http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pan-tsvwg-pie
  *FQ_CODEL and/or variants (speaker TBD) - 10 min
    http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nichols-tsvwg-codel
  compare/contrast goals/features (speaker TBD) - 10 min
    (need to mention packet scheduling versus pure single-queue AQM
     as distinguishing features here)

BoF Questions (chairs) - remaining time (1745 - 1830)
  (put up draft charter on screen for reference)
  - should packet scheduling be a part of the charter?
  - are the goals of this WG clear, well-scoped, solvable, and useful?
  - should Fred's document be an initial WG item?
  - how many people might be planning to work directly on algorithms?
    (writing the specs, implementing, testing / evaluating)
  - should the group require evaluation criteria and requirements to
    be finished before adopting algorithm specifications?
  - should the group initially aim for a single AQM spec, or take on
    multiple algorithms in parallel?
  - should an AQM working group be formed?
  - should the working group NOT be formed?

Adjourn BoF at or before 1830

-- 
Wes Eddy
MTI Systems