Subject: Re: [tsvwg] TCP Prague's RFC 5033 guidelines status?

From: Bob Briscoe <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2020 16:56:41 +0000

Jake,

Section 4.3 of ecn-l4s-id is a list of additions to these requirements, 
specifically for L4S congestion controls. So, as far as the editing of 
the initial L4S documents is concerned, I believe it is sufficient to 
clarify that the list of requirements in ecn-l4s-id is in addition to 
RFC5033, not in place of.

The specification of each L4S congestion control is where it would have 
to be demonstrated that each of these RFC5033 requirements have been 
addressed.

Review of specifications of new CCs is currently handled in iccrg (see 
the ref [NewCC_Proc] in the L4S arch draft). So I don't think that's a 
tsvwg ticket.

(I am getting to your email, about the DualQ-SCE alternative, that I 
deferred just before the interim - next.)

Bob

    [NewCC_Proc]
               Eggert, L., "Experimental Specification of New Congestion
               Control Algorithms", IETF Operational Note ion-tsv-alt-cc,
               July 2007.

On 10/11/2019 20:58, Holland, Jake wrote:
> Hi l4s-arch authors,
>
> In a side discussion, Pete mentioned the RFC 5033 guidelines list for
> new congestion controls, and looking through the items in Section 3, I
> wasn't sure whether or not they were all addressed in the L4S drafts and
> references:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5033#section-3
>
> Would it be possible to add a section that goes through the points from
> RFC 5033 section 3 and provides pointers to the text and/or research
> results you know of that addresses each of them?
>
> I think it would be very helpful for the review of the proposal to have
> those listed out instead of trying to find them by digging through the
> documents and references.
>
> I guess it would also be OK to provide such a map on the mailing list,
> but I'll suggest that I think it would be more helpful if there's a way
> to include it as a section in one of the drafts.
>
> (And if people agree this is a useful addition, should we open a new
> issue to track it?)
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Jake
>
>

-- 
________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe                               http://bobbriscoe.net/