Subject: [iccrg] Adoption of rLEDBAT and LEDBAT++

From: Jana Iyengar <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 12:23:33 +0000

Hello all,

As promised in Singapore, I am proposing adoption of the following drafts
in ICCRG:
LEDBAT++: draft-balasubramanian-iccrg-ledbatplusplus-01
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-balasubramanian-iccrg-ledbatplusplus-01>
rLEDBAT: draft-bagnulo-iccrg-rledbat-01
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bagnulo-iccrg-rledbat-01>

I don't think we need to have a long discussion on process here, and I
believe we can figure it out as it goes. But I will summarize what I said
in Singapore. Adoption here simply means that the RG thinks these are
well-documented solutions to potentially important problems. We expect the
authors to iterate on the drafts with continuous engagement with the RG.
Our intent is to only ship documents that have rough consensus.

If folks have an opinion on the adoption of either of these documents,
either in favor or opposing, please respond on this thread. I will close
this call in about 2 weeks, modulo discussion or opinions opposing adoption.

- jana

---

From: Michael Welzl <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 13:32:37 +0100

in favor
these are very good things to document!

the world is using LBE way too little  :)

> On 11 Feb 2020, at 13:23, Jana Iyengar <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> As promised in Singapore, I am proposing adoption of the following drafts in ICCRG:
> I don't think we need to have a long discussion on process here, and I believe we can figure it out as it goes. But I will summarize what I said in Singapore. Adoption here simply means that the RG thinks these are well-documented solutions to potentially important problems. We expect the authors to iterate on the drafts with continuous engagement with the RG. Our intent is to only ship documents that have rough consensus.
> 
> If folks have an opinion on the adoption of either of these documents, either in favor or opposing, please respond on this thread. I will close this call in about 2 weeks, modulo discussion or opinions opposing adoption.
> 
> - jana
> _______________________________________________
> iccrg mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/iccrg

---

From: Daniel Havey <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 09:26:55 -0800

We actually have plenty of usage. Privacy concerns prevent us from
collecting or reporting on user data but large organizations already rely
on LEDBAT++ to prevent network interference caused by large background data
transport tasks.

---

From: hiren <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 10:22:21 -0800

In favor.
Thanks to the authors for the drafts.

Cheers,
Hiren

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:42:36 -0600

Hi, Jana,

> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bagnulo-iccrg-rledbat-01>

Yes, please. Fixing problems in IETF Experimental protocols sounds like a
fine thing for ICCRG to do ...

Best,

Spencer