Subject: [tsvwg] DSCP for NQB - Gorry's slides

From: Gorry Fairhurst <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 16:20:37 +0100

David (and Wes),

Ana has made slides - uploaded.

I made new slides for the DSCP related to the NQB topic, I don't know 
whether this is a useful slide deck or not? Or whether we should use it 
to talk to Greg after the meeting? Could even be at the meeting? Taking 
lkater is OK.

It identifies options:

1. Only use DSCP 45 - which was eliminated because some percentage of 
paths remarked.

2. MUST NOT use DSCP 45 over transit, is only avoided by requiring 
remarking and carried as 5

3. SHOULD NOT use DSCP 45 over transit, but some will.

4. DSCP 5 defined as an aggregate, either can be used - with slightly 
different semantics.

Thoughts?

Gorry

---

From: Bob Briscoe <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 14:13:02 +0000

Gorry, [Adding Greg as draft author and presenter tomorrow]

Returning to your original question about whether the slides should be 
presented...
I don't know the time pressure - the chairs know that best.

But these slides would need some work before presenting. They don't 
explain what problem(s) with the current draft are trying to be solved.
(This is actually also a problem with the draft, where it recommends 
which DSCP to use over interconnects but it doesn't explain the problem.)

The draft currently says

    networks SHOULD remap NQB traffic to DSCP 5
    prior to interconnection, unless agreed otherwise between the
    interconnecting partners.

We might indeed need to complement this with what NOT to do, as in some 
of the options in these slides. But I'd like to understand why the IETF 
needs to constrain agreements between consenting operators.

Bob

On 23/03/2022 15:20, Gorry Fairhurst wrote:
> whether this is a useful slide deck or not? Or whether we should use 
> it to talk to Greg after the meeting? Could even be at the meeting? 
> Taking lkater is OK.
>
> It identifies options:
>

-- 
________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoehttp://bobbriscoe.net/

---

From: Bob Briscoe <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2022 11:44:01 +0000

Ana,

Thank you for your presentation today. the 8x8 grid was a really great 
way of explaining the problem succinctly.
Sry my audio screwed up (again). Yes, I was trying to say what Lars 
guessed - as well as ops area, suggest you offer to present to IEPG on 
the Sunday at the start of the next IETF.
It not only attracts primarily operators, but it also tends to attract 
primarily core network operators.

Admittedly, in that grouping you're less likely to find the culprits 
that cause precedence bleaching and other forms of diffserv mangling, 
but in terms of social and friendship networks, you will at least be 
speaking to people who are one hop away from them.

Bob

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