Subject: [PCN] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-karagiannis-pcn-hose-edge-behaviour-01

From: "Georgios Karagiannis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 18:54:03 +0000

Hi all

The v01 version of the draft-karagiannis-pcn-hose-edge-behaviour has been
submitted, see below. The update is based on the comments that have been
received during the PCN mailing list and during the previous IETF PCN
meeting!

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-karagiannis-pcn-hose-edge-behaviour-01.txt

Comments are welcome!

Best regards,
Georgios

--- Original Message ---
Date: 3/6/2010
From: "IETF I-D Submission Tool" <[email-masked]>
Subject: New Version Notification for
draft-karagiannis-pcn-hose-edge-behaviour-01

A new version of I-D, draft-karagiannis-pcn-hose-edge-behaviour-01.txt
has been successfuly submitted by Georgios Karagiannis and posted to the
IETF repository.

Filename:	 draft-karagiannis-pcn-hose-edge-behaviour
Revision:	 01
Title:		 PCN Boundary Node Behaviour for the HOSE Mode of Operation
Creation_date:	 2010-03-08
WG ID:		 Independent Submission
Number_of_pages: 22

Abstract:
Precongestion notification (PCN) is a means for protecting quality of
service for inelastic traffic admitted to a Diffserv domain.  The
overall PCN architecture is described in RFC 5559.  This memo is one
of a series describing possible boundary node behaviours for a PCN
domain.  The behaviour described here is denoted as the HOSE model.

The IETF Secretariat.

---

From: Fortune HUANG <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 15:33:32 -0700

Hi Georgios,

This version has almost resolved my comment about the decision point, which
is great.

A minor and maybe editorial comment, in the last paragraph of section 3.3.1,
it states "In the situation that the decision point is co-located with the
PCN-egress-node then it is assumed that the PCN decision point tasks are
accomplished by the PCN-egress node." I think the PCN decision point tasks
are always accomplished by the PCN decision point but not the
PCN-egress-node no matter where the decision point is located. That's the
reason that these functionalities (e.g. PCN-egress-node, PCN decision point,
PCN-ingress-node) are logical but not physical.

Best regards,
Fortune

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Georgios Karagiannis
Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 10:54 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [PCN] Fwd: New Version Notification
fordraft-karagiannis-pcn-hose-edge-behaviour-01

Hi all

Comments are welcome!

Best regards,
Georgios

--- Original Message ---
Date: 3/6/2010
From: "IETF I-D Submission Tool" <[email-masked]>
Subject: New Version Notification for

Abstract:

The IETF Secretariat.
_______________________________________________
PCN mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn

---

From: "Georgios Karagiannis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 23:40:59 +0000

Hi Fortune

Thanks for the comments!
What we meant is that in the case that the decision point is colocated
with the PCN-egress-node then the interactions between the decision
point and the PCN-egress-node are internal actions.

Best regards,
Georgios

---

From: Fortune HUANG <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 18:37:29 -0700

Hi Georgios,

I agree with what you said in your email, and I also suggest that we state
it that way in the draft.

Best regards,
Fortune

-----Original Message-----
From: Georgios Karagiannis [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 4:41 PM
To: Fortune HUANG; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [PCN] Fwd: New Version Notification

Hi Fortune

Thanks for the comments!

Best regards,
Georgios