From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Thu Aug 8 10:44:27 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA14144 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 10:44:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id KAA05956 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 10:45:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA04886; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 10:30:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA04830 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 10:30:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from salween.dallas.wrs.com ([204.181.206.196]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA13408 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 10:29:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from windriver.com (chewey.dallas.wrs.com [204.181.204.83]) by salween.dallas.wrs.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA10741 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 09:29:46 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <3D528125.3076F0C@windriver.com> Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002 09:33:09 -0500 From: Tom Irwin X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: diffserv@ietf.org References: <20020722161022.28735.qmail@webmail5.rediffmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Diffserv] RFC 3289 DiffServ MIB discrepancies Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In the process of implementing the RFC 3289 DiffServ MIB, the following errors and discrepancies were noted. 1. In the diffServClfrTable description (second paragraph), diffServClfrStatus should be diffServClfrStorage. This is an understandability issue. 2. The diffServClfrElementStatus description indicates that this entry cannot be deleted if there is a RowPointer pointing to it. A RowPointer is not used to select a classifier element, but rather the diffServClfrId and diffServClfrElementId index values. Consequently, the diffServClfrElementTable does not require a UsageCounter or a DestroyFlag. This is an understandability issue. 3. In the diffServActionSpecific description (third paragraph) erroneously references a meter. This is an understandability issue. 4. The diffServMinRateAbsolute description indicates that zero is a valid value. The SYNTAX range indicates (1..4294967295), but should be (0..4294967295). This is an understandability issue and a MIB implementation issue. 5. The diffServMinRateRelative description indicates that zero is a valid value and that the values are in units of 1/1000 of 1. The SYNTAX range indicates (1..4294967295), but should be (0..1000). This is an understandability issue and a MIB implementation issue. 6. The diffServMaxRateAbsolute description indicates that zero is a valid value. The SYNTAX range indicates (1..4294967295), but should be (0..4294967295). This is an understandability issue and a MIB implementation issue. 7. The diffServMaxRateRelative description indicates that zero is a valid value and that the values are in units of 1/1000 of 1. The SYNTAX range indicates (1..4294967295), but should be (0..1000). This is an understandability issue and a MIB implementation issue. Thank you, Tom _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Thu Aug 15 03:31:09 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA15868 for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 03:31:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id DAA06787 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 03:32:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA05793; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 03:21:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA05761 for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 03:21:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ws1-7.us4.outblaze.com (205-158-62-57.outblaze.com [205.158.62.57]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id DAA15641 for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 03:19:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 13595 invoked by uid 1001); 15 Aug 2002 07:20:28 -0000 Message-ID: <20020815072028.13594.qmail@mail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.41 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [202.190.176.132] by ws1-7.us4.outblaze.com with http for noruia@cutey.com; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 02:20:28 -0500 From: "ummuabdillah zainul" To: diffserv@ietf.org Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 02:20:28 -0500 X-Originating-Ip: 202.190.176.132 X-Originating-Server: ws1-7.us4.outblaze.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Diffserv] (no subject) Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit hi i would like to know how multimedia is implemented in diffserv using ns-2. thank you -- __________________________________________________________ Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup ÄÇ( _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Thu Aug 15 04:58:28 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA18090 for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 04:58:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id EAA12901 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 04:59:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAA12528; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 04:55:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAA12498 for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 04:55:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-gw1.hursley.ibm.com (mail-gw1.hursley.ibm.com [194.196.110.15]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA17978 for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 04:53:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [9.20.45.103] (helo=sp15en17.hursley.ibm.com) by mail-gw1.hursley.ibm.com with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17fGOi-0001Je-00; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 09:54:28 +0100 Received: from hursley.ibm.com (dhcp23-199.zurich.ibm.com [9.4.23.199]) by sp15en17.hursley.ibm.com (AIX4.3/8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA48204; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 09:54:27 +0100 Message-ID: <3D5B6C63.929181FB@hursley.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 10:54:59 +0200 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: IBM X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,fr,de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ummuabdillah zainul CC: diffserv@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diffserv] (no subject) References: <20020815072028.13594.qmail@mail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ummuabdillah zainul wrote: > > hi i would like to know how multimedia is implemented in diffserv using ns-2. thank you > -- You want the diffserv implementation list. See http://www.tip.csiro.au/dsimplementation/ Brian _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Thu Aug 15 23:57:17 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA25698 for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 23:57:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id XAA27678 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 23:58:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA27412; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 23:52:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA27381 for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 23:52:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from web13113.mail.yahoo.com (web13113.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.181]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id XAA25582 for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 23:50:57 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <20020816035217.46519.qmail@web13113.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [203.125.190.244] by web13113.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 20:52:17 PDT Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 20:52:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Vijay Valayatham Reply-To: vvalayatham@unispheresolutions.com Subject: Re: [Diffserv] (no subject) To: diffserv@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <3D5B6C63.929181FB@hursley.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org unsubscribe --- Brian E Carpenter wrote: > ummuabdillah zainul wrote: > > > > hi i would like to know how multimedia is implemented in diffserv > using ns-2. thank you > > -- > > You want the diffserv implementation list. > > See http://www.tip.csiro.au/dsimplementation/ > > Brian > > _______________________________________________ > diffserv mailing list > diffserv@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv > Archive: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Fri Aug 16 12:14:08 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA21232 for ; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 12:14:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id MAA12241 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 12:15:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA11513; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 12:05:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA11475 for ; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 12:05:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com [171.69.24.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA20640 for ; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 12:04:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from FRED-W2K6.cisco.com (stealth-10-32-253-235.cisco.com [10.32.253.235]) by sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g7GG4nhJ017892; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 09:04:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20020816090215.00aa5fa0@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com> X-Sender: fred@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 09:04:47 -0700 To: diffserv@ietf.org From: Fred Baker Subject: Re: [Diffserv] RFC 3289 DiffServ MIB discrepancies Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, smith@acm.org In-Reply-To: <3D528125.3076F0C@windriver.com> References: <20020722161022.28735.qmail@webmail5.rediffmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org Tom has noted some issues, which sound like they call for an updated RFC. I'm wondering if any other issues need to be addressed in the update? _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Tue Aug 20 00:14:56 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA23652 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 00:14:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id AAA02834 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 00:16:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA01306; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 23:58:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA01274 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 23:57:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com (205-158-62-49.outblaze.com [205.158.62.49]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id XAA23124 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 23:56:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 77264 invoked by uid 1001); 20 Aug 2002 03:57:26 -0000 Message-ID: <20020820035726.77263.qmail@mail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.41 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [202.190.176.132] by ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com with http for noruia@cutey.com; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 22:57:25 -0500 From: "ummuabdillah zainul" To: diffserv@ietf.org Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 22:57:25 -0500 X-Originating-Ip: 202.190.176.132 X-Originating-Server: ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Diffserv] (no subject) Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit i am quite new in diffserv. i need to know what is the relationship of VoIP over Leased Line (Using PPP) Scenario with diffserv. i am soo confused how to implement it in ns2 programming. -- __________________________________________________________ Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Tue Aug 20 01:02:18 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA24893 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 01:02:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id BAA06114 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 01:03:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA04624; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 00:43:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA04582 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 00:43:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com (205-158-62-49.outblaze.com [205.158.62.49]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id AAA24207 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 00:42:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 41722 invoked by uid 1001); 20 Aug 2002 04:42:52 -0000 Message-ID: <20020820044252.41721.qmail@mail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.41 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [202.190.176.132] by ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com with http for noruia@cutey.com; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 23:42:52 -0500 From: "ummuabdillah zainul" To: diffserv@ietf.org Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 23:42:52 -0500 X-Originating-Ip: 202.190.176.132 X-Originating-Server: ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Diffserv] (no subject) Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit hi i would like to know is it possible to setup voip over leased line (using PPP) in diffserv? we are using ns2.1b9 programming. thank you -- __________________________________________________________ Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Tue Aug 20 03:50:34 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA07081 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 03:50:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id DAA23166 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 03:51:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA22082; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 03:32:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA22051 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 03:32:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-gw1.hursley.ibm.com (mail-gw1.hursley.ibm.com [194.196.110.15]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA06679 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 03:31:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [9.20.45.103] (helo=sp15en17.hursley.ibm.com) by mail-gw1.hursley.ibm.com with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17h3V1-00078c-00; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 08:32:23 +0100 Received: from hursley.ibm.com (dhcp23-199.zurich.ibm.com [9.4.23.199]) by sp15en17.hursley.ibm.com (AIX4.3/8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA39916; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 08:32:21 +0100 Message-ID: <3D61F0A1.E07AEBE7@hursley.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 09:32:49 +0200 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: IBM X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,fr,de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ummuabdillah zainul CC: diffserv@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diffserv] (no subject) References: <20020820035726.77263.qmail@mail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is an implementation question. Please take it to the diffserv implementation list. http://www.tip.csiro.au/dsimplementation/ Brian Carpenter diffserv co-chair ummuabdillah zainul wrote: > > i am quite new in diffserv. i need to know what is the relationship of > > VoIP over Leased Line (Using PPP) Scenario with diffserv. i am soo > confused how to implement it in ns2 programming. > > > -- > __________________________________________________________ > Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com > http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup > > _______________________________________________ > diffserv mailing list > diffserv@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv > Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Brian E Carpenter Distinguished Engineer, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM On assignment at the IBM Zurich Laboratory, Switzerland _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Tue Aug 20 03:50:43 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA07096 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 03:50:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id DAA23180 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 03:52:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA22009; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 03:32:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA21966 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 03:32:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-gw1.hursley.ibm.com (mail-gw1.hursley.ibm.com [194.196.110.15]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA06656 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 03:30:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [9.20.45.103] (helo=sp15en17.hursley.ibm.com) by mail-gw1.hursley.ibm.com with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17h3UD-0004TU-00; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 08:31:33 +0100 Received: from hursley.ibm.com (dhcp23-199.zurich.ibm.com [9.4.23.199]) by sp15en17.hursley.ibm.com (AIX4.3/8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA25610; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 08:31:30 +0100 Message-ID: <3D61F06E.9462892C@hursley.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 09:31:58 +0200 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: IBM X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,fr,de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ummuabdillah zainul CC: diffserv@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diffserv] (no subject) References: <20020820044252.41721.qmail@mail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is an implementation question. Please take it to the diffserv implementation list. http://www.tip.csiro.au/dsimplementation/ Brian Carpenter diffserv co-chair ummuabdillah zainul wrote: > > hi i would like to know is it possible to setup voip > over leased line (using PPP) in diffserv? we are using > ns2.1b9 programming. thank you > > -- > __________________________________________________________ > Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com > http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup > > _______________________________________________ > diffserv mailing list > diffserv@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv > Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Brian E Carpenter Distinguished Engineer, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM On assignment at the IBM Zurich Laboratory, Switzerland _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Tue Aug 20 08:13:00 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA11504 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 08:12:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id IAA05250 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 08:14:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA03957; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 07:57:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA03926 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 07:56:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp.wp.pl (smtp.wp.pl [212.77.101.161]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA11136 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 07:55:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: (WP-SMTPD 23022 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2002 11:56:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) ([212.77.101.203]) (envelope-sender ) by smtp1.free.wp-sa.pl (WP-SMTPD) with SMTP for ; 20 Aug 2002 11:56:14 -0000 Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 13:56:14 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Maciej_Paw=b3owski?= To: diffserv@ietf.org Message-ID: <3d622e5ec1c63@wp.pl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Interfejs WWW poczty Wirtualnej Polski Organization: Poczta Wirtualnej Polski S.A. http://www.wp.pl/ X-IP: 62.243.244.4, 172.28.172.125 X-AntiVirus: skaner antywirusowy poczty Wirtualnej Polski S. A. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Diffserv] How to withdraw from this mailing list? Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Konkurs nie tylko dla orlów. Jesli masz < 26 sprawd¼ koniecznie! Kliknij! < http://encyklopedia.wp.pl/konkurs > _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Mon Aug 26 03:41:58 2002 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA02784 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 03:41:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7Q7h7u18932 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 03:43:07 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7Q7ORo17739; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 03:24:27 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7Q7EPo17425 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 03:14:32 -0400 Received: from mail-gw1.hursley.ibm.com (mail-gw1.hursley.ibm.com [194.196.110.15]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA02405 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 03:12:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [9.20.45.103] (helo=sp15en17.hursley.ibm.com) by mail-gw1.hursley.ibm.com with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17jE4B-000ESc-00; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 08:13:39 +0100 Received: from hursley.ibm.com (dhcp23-199.zurich.ibm.com [9.4.23.199]) by sp15en17.hursley.ibm.com (AIX4.3/8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA71640; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 08:13:39 +0100 Message-ID: <3D69D53D.5E3FB05@hursley.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 09:14:05 +0200 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: IBM X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,fr,de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fred Baker CC: diffserv@ietf.org, khchan@nortelnetworks.com, smith@acm.org Subject: Re: [Diffserv] RFC 3289 DiffServ MIB discrepancies References: <20020722161022.28735.qmail@webmail5.rediffmail.com> <5.1.1.6.2.20020816090215.00aa5fa0@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Fred Baker wrote: > > Tom has noted some issues, which sound like they call for an updated RFC. > I'm wondering if any other issues need to be addressed in the update? Since nobody else raised any issues in over a week, I suggest that Fred goes ahead with an update. Brian _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Aug 27 11:34:32 2002 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA28342 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 11:34:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7RFZYQ15955 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 11:35:34 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7RF9xo14816; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 11:09:59 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7REuAo13799 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 10:56:10 -0400 Received: from salween.dallas.wrs.com ([204.181.206.196]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA26539 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 10:54:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from windriver.com (chewey.dallas.wrs.com [204.181.204.83]) by salween.dallas.wrs.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA04874; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 09:54:25 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <3D6B93A0.1270A774@windriver.com> Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 09:58:40 -0500 From: Tom Irwin X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brian E Carpenter CC: Fred Baker , diffserv@ietf.org, khchan@nortelnetworks.com, smith@acm.org Subject: Re: [Diffserv] RFC 3289 DiffServ MIB discrepancies References: <20020722161022.28735.qmail@webmail5.rediffmail.com> <5.1.1.6.2.20020816090215.00aa5fa0@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com> <3D69D53D.5E3FB05@hursley.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have additional input if the DiffServ RFC is going to be updated. 1. During implementation, there has been some confusion on the "reuse of structural elements" in section 2.2. It is clear from the comments and the MIB that counters cannot be effectively reused. What appears confusing is the case when an entire (or partial) DiffServ tree used for a specific interface ifIndex and direction is reused. Is the DiffServ tree in this case just a template such that all of the data path elements are replicated (counters will not work properly) for another interface? This seems reasonable since other data path elements such as queues and schedulers are clearly interface dependent. It is important to remove this ambiguity since the RowPointer usage does not prohibit this "not generally recommended" application. What is the intent? 2. Minor update in section 3.2.2: ' Differentiated Services Code Point ' to ' Differentiated Services Code Point, including "any" ' 3. Figure 9b in section 3.7.2.1 is somewhat difficult at first to follow due to how the multiplexing is shown in the Yellow "Count Action" (an action only has a single input). Thank you for your work, Tom Irwin Brian E Carpenter wrote: > > Fred Baker wrote: > > > > Tom has noted some issues, which sound like they call for an updated RFC. > > I'm wondering if any other issues need to be addressed in the update? > > Since nobody else raised any issues in over a week, I suggest that Fred > goes ahead with an update. > > Brian > _______________________________________________ > diffserv mailing list > diffserv@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv > Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Aug 27 16:16:31 2002 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA10916 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:16:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7RKHZO32151 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:17:35 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7RK3Do31043; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:03:13 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7RJp3o30607 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:51:03 -0400 Received: from sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.163.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA09579 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:49:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from FRED-W2K6.cisco.com (stealth-10-32-253-235.cisco.com [10.32.253.235]) by sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g7RJoOKC011296; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 12:50:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20020827124918.01c33f48@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com> X-Sender: fred@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 12:50:22 -0700 To: diffserv@ietf.org From: Fred Baker Subject: Re: [Diffserv] RFC 3289 DiffServ MIB discrepancies Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, smith@acm.org In-Reply-To: <3D6B93A0.1270A774@windriver.com> References: <20020722161022.28735.qmail@webmail5.rediffmail.com> <5.1.1.6.2.20020816090215.00aa5fa0@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com> <3D69D53D.5E3FB05@hursley.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , At 09:58 AM 8/27/2002 -0500, Tom Irwin wrote: >I have additional input if the DiffServ RFC is going to be updated. It appears that this set of comments were only submitted because Brian said "so we're going to do something about them." If anyone else has specific comments that should be addressed, the time to put them to the list is now. _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Aug 27 17:08:14 2002 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA12797 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 17:08:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7RL9Jb03738 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 17:09:19 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7RKrfo01679; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:53:41 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7RKkSo01464 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:46:28 -0400 Received: from sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.163.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA11939 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:44:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from FRED-W2K6.cisco.com (dhcp-sb1-184-217.cisco.com [171.69.184.217]) by sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g7RKj5KC026162; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 13:45:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20020827134441.07e28e10@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com> X-Sender: fred@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 13:45:04 -0700 To: Alan Smith From: Fred Baker Subject: Re: [Diffserv] RFC 3289 DiffServ MIB discrepancies Cc: diffserv@ietf.org, khchan@nortelnetworks.com, smith@acm.org In-Reply-To: <200208271954.g7RJsFx24065@jove.CS.Berkeley.EDU> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , At 12:54 PM 8/27/2002 -0700, Alan Smith wrote: >I suspect that you've got the wrong Smith on this email list. sorry. Should be ah_smith@acm.org _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Wed Aug 28 03:04:40 2002 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA18863 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 03:04:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7S75nx08603 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 03:05:49 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7S6r7o08057; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 02:53:07 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7RJsNo30739 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:54:23 -0400 Received: from jove.CS.Berkeley.EDU (IDENT:root@jove.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.153.208]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA09887 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:52:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from smith@localhost) by jove.CS.Berkeley.EDU (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7RJsFx24065; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 12:54:15 -0700 Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 12:54:15 -0700 From: Alan Smith Message-Id: <200208271954.g7RJsFx24065@jove.CS.Berkeley.EDU> To: diffserv@ietf.org, fred@cisco.com Subject: Re: [Diffserv] RFC 3289 DiffServ MIB discrepancies Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, smith@acm.org Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , I suspect that you've got the wrong Smith on this email list. Alan Smith From fred@cisco.com Tue Aug 27 12:47:46 2002 Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 12:50:22 -0700 To: diffserv@ietf.org From: Fred Baker Subject: Re: [Diffserv] RFC 3289 DiffServ MIB discrepancies Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, smith@acm.org At 09:58 AM 8/27/2002 -0500, Tom Irwin wrote: >I have additional input if the DiffServ RFC is going to be updated. It appears that this set of comments were only submitted because Brian said "so we're going to do something about them." If anyone else has specific comments that should be addressed, the time to put them to the list is now. _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Wed Aug 28 03:09:27 2002 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA18953 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 03:09:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7S7Ab609309 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 03:10:37 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7S6kDo07864; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 02:46:18 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7RJGeo28126 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:16:40 -0400 Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA06546 for <1timer>; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 14:44:44 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200208271844.OAA06546@ietf.org> From: Phil Roberts To: IETF WG Participants: ; Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 14:44:44 -0400 Subject: [Diffserv] Nomcom call for volunteers Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , The members of the IESG and IAB and the IETF chair are selected by a nominations committee made up of volunteers from the IETF community. The nominations committee is now in the process of being formed and volunteers are being accepted until Sep 6. Please see (http://www.ietf.org/nomcom/msg19765.html) for information if you are interested in volunteering to be on the nominations committee. _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Thu Aug 29 22:03:08 2002 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA18588 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 22:03:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7U24Gl20362 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 22:04:16 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7U1mNo19739; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 21:48:23 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7U1a5o18833 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 21:36:05 -0400 Received: from sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.163.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA17564 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 21:34:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from FRED-W2K6.cisco.com (stealth-10-32-253-235.cisco.com [10.32.253.235]) by sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g7U1ZNKC004343; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 18:35:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20020829183359.04bb0da0@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com> X-Sender: fred@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 18:35:23 -0700 To: Kwok Ho Chan From: Fred Baker Cc: ah_smith@acm.org, diffserv@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.0.20020829194447.02514980@zbl6c002.corpeast.bayne tworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [Diffserv] Re: Fwd: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 NOW AVAILABLE Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , At 07:45 PM 8/29/2002 -0400, Kwok Ho Chan wrote: >Fred: >Are you referring to the attached E-Mail? yes. I would like all comments edited into the new document to have at least been seen by the working group. I don't think we'll get a lot of commentary, but people should have the opportunity. >-- Kwok -- > >>From: "Andrew Smith" >>To: "Brian E Carpenter" , "Fred Baker" >>, >> "Chan, Kwok-Ho [BL60:470:EXCH]" >>Cc: , , >> "Dan Grossman" >>Subject: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC >>3289 NOW AVAILABLE >>Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:20:51 -0700 >>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) >>Importance: Normal >>X-SMTP-HELO: falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net >>X-SMTP-MAIL-FROM: ah_smith@acm.org >>X-SMTP-RCPT-TO: khchan@nortelnetworks.com >>X-SMTP-PEER-INFO: falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.74] >> >>I just found out about the "48 hours" today: most of these comments are >>probably (way) too late but there are some editorial things buried in here >>that might be helpful at this late stage: >> >>Please change my contact info: >> OLD: >> >> A. Smith >> Allegro Networks >> NEW: >> A. Smith >> Harbour Networks >> >>11. Authors' Addresses >> >>OLD: >> Andrew Smith >> Allegro Networks >> 6399 San Ignacio Ave >> San Jose, CA 95119 >> >> EMail: andrew@allegronetworks.com >> NEW: >> Andrew Smith >> Harbour Networks >> Jiuling Building >> 21 North Xisanhuan Ave. >> Beijing, 100089, PRC >> >> EMail: ah_smith@acm.org >> >> >> >>3.5.3. diffServMinRateTable - The Minimum Rate Table: The description (both >>here and in the comments in the MIB module and in the DESCRIPTION clauses) >>is unclear on when the Rate and when the Priority parameters are to be used >>and what is their combined effect: >> >> "When the output rate of a queue or scheduler must be given a minimum >> rate or a priority, this is done using the diffServMinRateTable. >> Rates may be expressed as absolute rates, or as a fraction of >> ifSpeed, and imply the use of a rate-based scheduler such as WFQ or >> WRR. The use of a priority implies the use of a Priority Scheduler. >> Only one of the Absolute or Relative rates needs to be set; the other >> takes the relevant value as a result. Excess capacity is distributed >> proportionally among the inputs to a scheduler using the assured >> rate. More complex functionality may be described by augmenting this >> MIB." >> >>I thought that the type of scheduler was implied by diffServSchedulerMethod, >>not by "use of a priority". And if you're doing strict priority scheduling, >>neither of Absolute or Relative rates needs to be set, right? Text above >>seems to imply otherwise. See also below. >> >>3.5.5 There's no reference to figure 4. Perhaps it should be from the >>paragraph at the bottom of p18? >> >>3.5.5 Is there a way to keep this set of diagrams closer to (in-line with) >>the text describing them, or at least, on the same page? I know it wastes >>paper/bytes but would add to clarity. >> >>3.5.5 I find some of this relatively new text confusing (this is the first >>time I've seen it so tell me if I'm too late with the following comments). >>Specifically: >> >> "For representing a Strict Priority scheduler, each scheduler input is >> assigned a priority with respect to all the other inputs feeding the >> same scheduler, with default values for the other parameters. >> Higher-priority traffic that is not being delayed for shaping will be >> serviced before a lower-priority input. An example is found in >> Figure 2." >> >>Clearer (or, at least, more accurate) is: >> >> "For representing a Strict Priority scheduler, the >>diffServSchedulerMethod is set to diffServSchedulerPriority and the >>prededing queue or scheduler feeding this scheduler input is assigned a >>priority in its associated diffServMinRateEntry with respect to all the >>other inputs feeding the same scheduler (the value of the other parameters >>in this entry are irrelevant). Traffic from higher-priority inputs to this >>scheduler will be serviced before that from lower-priority inputs. An >>example is found in Figure 2." >> >>Figures 3, 4 and 5: suggest you use more specific labels in some of the >>boxes to remove confusion: >>- figure 3, replace "Rate" with "MaxRate" in each box; >>- figure 4, put something in the empty boxes e.g. "n/a" or leave them out. >>Replace "Shaping Rate" with "MaxRate" - we have no parameter called shaping >>rate. >> >>3.5.5: suggest you lose the NOTE and its text, just above figure 4, or at >>least join it up with the following paragraph. >> >>3.5.5: last paragraph should be part of 3.6 really. And glue Figure 6 to >>this paragraph for clarity. >> >>3.6: change "four AF classes" to "four AF classes, each with 3 levels of >>drop precedence or 'colours'". We must be clear that this is just an example >>of an AF implementation that chooses to do 4 classes, each with 3 colours. >> >>3.6: Suggest you use the same example scenario for figures 6 and 7 - it's >>confusing to use different example scenarios. Figure 7 introduces a new kind >>of "hybrid" notation for the first time (we've always gone left-to-right >>before, not top-to-bottom - I preferred the former for clarity): I suggest >>it needs some words to explain the notation (rhetorical questions: what do >>the lines imply when they don't have arrowheads? what are the 2 or 3 >>different lines exiting from the meters? These are all deducible from the >>following text but it's made harder work due to the new notation. BTW, >>there's an arrow missing out of the back/bottom/right Action box. >> >>3.6: suggest you add the "everything else" case that you discuss in the text >>to figure 7. >> >>3.6.: there's no reference to figure 7 in the text. >> >>3.6 and 3.7: actually, I'm not sure why these sections are here in this >>document - a few years ago, we took out similar "tutorial" material and put >>it in the Model draft. There's nothing in these sections that is specific to >>the MIB. The right thing to have in this document is the "translation" of an >>example like this into the structures and linkages used by the MIB but these >>sections do not help with this. We had such material in draft-09 and it has >>disappeared (I'm not saying 3.6 and 3.7 aren't useful material but it just >>does not belong in this document) - I think this is a backward step. >> >>Anyhow, I'm probably too late to the party with most of these comments - I >>should have reviewed it when the IESG last call was in progress (I didn't >>realise so much had changed since -09 which was the last version that I >>reviewed properly). >> >>Andrew >> >> >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian@hursley.ibm.com] >>Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 5:56 AM >>To: Fred Baker >>Cc: knichols@packetdesign.com; rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org; Andrew Smith; >>Kwok Ho Chan >>Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC >>3289 NOW AVAILABLE >> >> >>OK, in view of Kwok's response we can give it another day or say, but >>then... >> >> Brian >> >>Fred Baker wrote: >> > >> > You may need to make an executive decision here. Andrew and Kwok are AWOL. >> > >> > >Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 19:50:58 GMT >> > >To: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com >> > >Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 >> > > NOW AVAILABLE >> > >Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, mankin@ISI.EDU, sob@harvard.edu, >> > > bwijnen@lucent.com, fred@cisco.com >> > >From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >> > >X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII >> > > >> > >Kwok Ho and Andrew, >> > > >> > >We still have not heard from you regarding this document. Please let >> > >us know if there are any corrections required. >> > > >> > >We are waiting to hear from you. >> > > >> > >RFC Editor >> > > >> > > >> > >----- Begin Included Message ----- >> > > >> > > >From rfc-ed@ISI.EDU Thu May 23 16:22:59 2002 >> > >Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 23:22:45 GMT >> > >To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, fred@cisco.com >> > >Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 >> > > NOW AVAILABLE >> > >Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, >>mankin@ISI.EDU, >> > > sob@harvard.edu, bwijnen@lucent.com >> > >From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >> > >X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII >> > >X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 >> > >Content-Length: 3636 >> > > >> > >Kwok Ho and Andrew, >> > > >> > >Please let us know if the document is ready to be published. >> > > >> > >We are awaiting your reply. >> > > >> > >Thank you. >> > > >> > >RFC Editor >> > > >> > > >> > > > From rfc-ed@ISI.EDU Tue May 21 09:25:15 2002 >> > > > Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 16:24:54 GMT >> > > > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, fred@cisco.com >> > > > Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 >> > > > NOW AVAILABLE >> > > > Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, >>mankin@ISI.EDU, >> > > > sob@harvard.edu, bwijnen@lucent.com >> > > > From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >> > > > X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII >> > > > X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 >> > > > Content-Length: 2866 >> > > > >> > > > Authors, >> > > > >> > > > We have not heard any further from you regarding this document. We >> > > > would appreciate a confirmation that the document is ready to be >> > > > published as it now appears at: >> > > > >> > > > ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/authors/rfc3289.txt >> > > > >> > > > We will wait to hear from you before continuing on. >> > > > >> > > > Thank you. >> > > > >> > > > RFC Editor >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > From rfc-ed@ISI.EDU Mon May 13 11:51:19 2002 >> > > > > Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 18:50:53 GMT >> > > > > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, fred@cisco.com >> > > > > Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 >> > > > > NOW AVAILABLE >> > > > > Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, >> > > mankin@ISI.EDU, >> > > > > sob@harvard.edu, bwijnen@lucent.com >> > > > > From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >> > > > > X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII >> > > > > X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 >> > > > > Content-Length: 1984 >> > > > > >> > > > > Fred, >> > > > > >> > > > > Thank you for bringing this to our attention. It now parses >> > > > > successfully. >> > > > > >> > > > > We have updated your contact information in the authors address >> > > > > section, as well as within the mib. >> > > > > >> > > > > Please let us know if there are any further corrections required. >>We >> > > > > will wait to hear from you. >> > > > > >> > > > > Thank you. >> > > > > >> > > > > RFC editor >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > From fred@cisco.com Fri May 10 01:03:56 2002 >> > > > > > X-Sender: fred@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com >> > > > > > X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 >> > > > > > Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 16:03:24 +0800 >> > > > > > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >> > > > > > From: Fred Baker >> > > > > > Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 >> > > > > > NOW AVAILABLE >> > > > > > Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, >> > > > > > rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, mankin@ISI.EDU, sob@harvard.edu, >> > > > > > bwijnen@lucent.com >> > > > > > Mime-Version: 1.0 >> > > > > > X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 >> > > > > > >> > > > > > At 10:37 PM 5/9/2002 +0000, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org wrote: >> > > > > > >FYI: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >W: f(rfc3289.mi2), (42,1) Textual convention "Dscp" defined but >> > > not used >> > > > > > >W: f(rfc3289.mi2), (52,1) Textual convention "DscpOrAny" defined >>but >> > > > > > >not used >> > > > > > >> > > > > > these two warnings come up because the TCs are in a separate MIB >> > > Module >> > > > > > from the main mib, and are imported into it. They are fine. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > My contact information has changed slightly; I have a new physical >> > > address. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>/=====================================================================/ >> > > > > > | Fred Baker | 1121 Via Del Rey >>| >> > > > > > | Cisco Fellow | Santa Barbara, >>California | >> > > > > > +--------------------------------+ 93117 USA >>| >> > > > > > | Nothing will ever be attempted,| phone: +1-805-681-0115 >>| >> > > > > > | if all possible objections must| fax: +1-413-473-2403 >>| >> > > > > > | be first overcome. | >>| >> > > > > > | Dr. Johnson, Rasselas, 1759| >>| >> > > > > > >>/=====================================================================/ >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > >----- End Included Message ----- > _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Thu Aug 29 23:06:10 2002 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA20997 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 23:06:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7U37JJ24427 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 23:07:19 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7U2nMo23028; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 22:49:22 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7U2gNo22805 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 22:42:23 -0400 Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.22]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA19905 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 22:40:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from user-vcaunp6.dsl.mindspring.com ([216.175.95.38] helo=ANDREWLAPTOP) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 17kbjh-0007QY-00 for diffserv@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 19:42:13 -0700 From: "Andrew Smith" To: Subject: RE: [Diffserv] Re: Fwd: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 NOW AVAILABLE Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 19:41:56 -0700 Message-ID: <00f601c24fce$d19511a0$1400000a@ANDREWLAPTOP> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.2.20020829183359.04bb0da0@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm not convinced that now is the right time to be updating this MIB and/or the RFC that includes it. Some of Tom Irwin's first set of comments fix errors but some (and all of his second set of comments) are clarifications, as were most of mine from May 3th 2002 (below). If we must, then I'd suggest just fixing the syntax errors in the MIB module. But don't things like this usually wait for a "natural" refresh cycle e.g. an attempt to move an RFC to Draft standard? I'd hate to destabilise anyone's plans to implement the current RFC. We've got published/archived fixes on the record so I don't see the urgency to update (other than tidiness). And it's quite likely that we'd be able to remove 20 pages or more with the benefit of another year or so more implementation experience. Just my thoughts - I don't have any significant stake in any current implementation plans so it really ought to be up to others to say what they want done. Andrew Smith -----Original Message----- From: diffserv-admin@ietf.org [mailto:diffserv-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Fred Baker Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 6:35 PM To: Kwok Ho Chan Cc: ah_smith@acm.org; diffserv@ietf.org Subject: [Diffserv] Re: Fwd: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 NOW AVAILABLE At 07:45 PM 8/29/2002 -0400, Kwok Ho Chan wrote: >Fred: >Are you referring to the attached E-Mail? yes. I would like all comments edited into the new document to have at least been seen by the working group. I don't think we'll get a lot of commentary, but people should have the opportunity. >-- Kwok -- > >>From: "Andrew Smith" >>To: "Brian E Carpenter" , "Fred Baker" >>, >> "Chan, Kwok-Ho [BL60:470:EXCH]" >>Cc: , , >> "Dan Grossman" >>Subject: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC >>3289 NOW AVAILABLE >>Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:20:51 -0700 >>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) >>Importance: Normal >>X-SMTP-HELO: falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net >>X-SMTP-MAIL-FROM: ah_smith@acm.org >>X-SMTP-RCPT-TO: khchan@nortelnetworks.com >>X-SMTP-PEER-INFO: falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.74] >> >>I just found out about the "48 hours" today: most of these comments are >>probably (way) too late but there are some editorial things buried in here >>that might be helpful at this late stage: >> >>Please change my contact info: >> OLD: >> >> A. Smith >> Allegro Networks >> NEW: >> A. Smith >> Harbour Networks >> >>11. Authors' Addresses >> >>OLD: >> Andrew Smith >> Allegro Networks >> 6399 San Ignacio Ave >> San Jose, CA 95119 >> >> EMail: andrew@allegronetworks.com >> NEW: >> Andrew Smith >> Harbour Networks >> Jiuling Building >> 21 North Xisanhuan Ave. >> Beijing, 100089, PRC >> >> EMail: ah_smith@acm.org >> >> >> >>3.5.3. diffServMinRateTable - The Minimum Rate Table: The description (both >>here and in the comments in the MIB module and in the DESCRIPTION clauses) >>is unclear on when the Rate and when the Priority parameters are to be used >>and what is their combined effect: >> >> "When the output rate of a queue or scheduler must be given a minimum >> rate or a priority, this is done using the diffServMinRateTable. >> Rates may be expressed as absolute rates, or as a fraction of >> ifSpeed, and imply the use of a rate-based scheduler such as WFQ or >> WRR. The use of a priority implies the use of a Priority Scheduler. >> Only one of the Absolute or Relative rates needs to be set; the other >> takes the relevant value as a result. Excess capacity is distributed >> proportionally among the inputs to a scheduler using the assured >> rate. More complex functionality may be described by augmenting this >> MIB." >> >>I thought that the type of scheduler was implied by diffServSchedulerMethod, >>not by "use of a priority". And if you're doing strict priority scheduling, >>neither of Absolute or Relative rates needs to be set, right? Text above >>seems to imply otherwise. See also below. >> >>3.5.5 There's no reference to figure 4. Perhaps it should be from the >>paragraph at the bottom of p18? >> >>3.5.5 Is there a way to keep this set of diagrams closer to (in-line with) >>the text describing them, or at least, on the same page? I know it wastes >>paper/bytes but would add to clarity. >> >>3.5.5 I find some of this relatively new text confusing (this is the first >>time I've seen it so tell me if I'm too late with the following comments). >>Specifically: >> >> "For representing a Strict Priority scheduler, each scheduler input is >> assigned a priority with respect to all the other inputs feeding the >> same scheduler, with default values for the other parameters. >> Higher-priority traffic that is not being delayed for shaping will be >> serviced before a lower-priority input. An example is found in >> Figure 2." >> >>Clearer (or, at least, more accurate) is: >> >> "For representing a Strict Priority scheduler, the >>diffServSchedulerMethod is set to diffServSchedulerPriority and the >>prededing queue or scheduler feeding this scheduler input is assigned a >>priority in its associated diffServMinRateEntry with respect to all the >>other inputs feeding the same scheduler (the value of the other parameters >>in this entry are irrelevant). Traffic from higher-priority inputs to this >>scheduler will be serviced before that from lower-priority inputs. An >>example is found in Figure 2." >> >>Figures 3, 4 and 5: suggest you use more specific labels in some of the >>boxes to remove confusion: >>- figure 3, replace "Rate" with "MaxRate" in each box; >>- figure 4, put something in the empty boxes e.g. "n/a" or leave them out. >>Replace "Shaping Rate" with "MaxRate" - we have no parameter called shaping >>rate. >> >>3.5.5: suggest you lose the NOTE and its text, just above figure 4, or at >>least join it up with the following paragraph. >> >>3.5.5: last paragraph should be part of 3.6 really. And glue Figure 6 to >>this paragraph for clarity. >> >>3.6: change "four AF classes" to "four AF classes, each with 3 levels of >>drop precedence or 'colours'". We must be clear that this is just an example >>of an AF implementation that chooses to do 4 classes, each with 3 colours. >> >>3.6: Suggest you use the same example scenario for figures 6 and 7 - it's >>confusing to use different example scenarios. Figure 7 introduces a new kind >>of "hybrid" notation for the first time (we've always gone left-to-right >>before, not top-to-bottom - I preferred the former for clarity): I suggest >>it needs some words to explain the notation (rhetorical questions: what do >>the lines imply when they don't have arrowheads? what are the 2 or 3 >>different lines exiting from the meters? These are all deducible from the >>following text but it's made harder work due to the new notation. BTW, >>there's an arrow missing out of the back/bottom/right Action box. >> >>3.6: suggest you add the "everything else" case that you discuss in the text >>to figure 7. >> >>3.6.: there's no reference to figure 7 in the text. >> >>3.6 and 3.7: actually, I'm not sure why these sections are here in this >>document - a few years ago, we took out similar "tutorial" material and put >>it in the Model draft. There's nothing in these sections that is specific to >>the MIB. The right thing to have in this document is the "translation" of an >>example like this into the structures and linkages used by the MIB but these >>sections do not help with this. We had such material in draft-09 and it has >>disappeared (I'm not saying 3.6 and 3.7 aren't useful material but it just >>does not belong in this document) - I think this is a backward step. >> >>Anyhow, I'm probably too late to the party with most of these comments - I >>should have reviewed it when the IESG last call was in progress (I didn't >>realise so much had changed since -09 which was the last version that I >>reviewed properly). >> >>Andrew >> >> >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian@hursley.ibm.com] >>Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 5:56 AM >>To: Fred Baker >>Cc: knichols@packetdesign.com; rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org; Andrew Smith; >>Kwok Ho Chan >>Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC >>3289 NOW AVAILABLE >> >> >>OK, in view of Kwok's response we can give it another day or say, but >>then... >> >> Brian >> >>Fred Baker wrote: >> > >> > You may need to make an executive decision here. Andrew and Kwok are AWOL. >> > >> > >Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 19:50:58 GMT >> > >To: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com >> > >Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 >> > > NOW AVAILABLE >> > >Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, mankin@ISI.EDU, sob@harvard.edu, >> > > bwijnen@lucent.com, fred@cisco.com >> > >From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >> > >X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII >> > > >> > >Kwok Ho and Andrew, >> > > >> > >We still have not heard from you regarding this document. Please let >> > >us know if there are any corrections required. >> > > >> > >We are waiting to hear from you. >> > > >> > >RFC Editor >> > > >> > > >> > >----- Begin Included Message ----- >> > > >> > > >From rfc-ed@ISI.EDU Thu May 23 16:22:59 2002 >> > >Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 23:22:45 GMT >> > >To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, fred@cisco.com >> > >Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 >> > > NOW AVAILABLE >> > >Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, >>mankin@ISI.EDU, >> > > sob@harvard.edu, bwijnen@lucent.com >> > >From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >> > >X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII >> > >X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 >> > >Content-Length: 3636 >> > > >> > >Kwok Ho and Andrew, >> > > >> > >Please let us know if the document is ready to be published. >> > > >> > >We are awaiting your reply. >> > > >> > >Thank you. >> > > >> > >RFC Editor >> > > >> > > >> > > > From rfc-ed@ISI.EDU Tue May 21 09:25:15 2002 >> > > > Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 16:24:54 GMT >> > > > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, fred@cisco.com >> > > > Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 >> > > > NOW AVAILABLE >> > > > Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, >>mankin@ISI.EDU, >> > > > sob@harvard.edu, bwijnen@lucent.com >> > > > From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >> > > > X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII >> > > > X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 >> > > > Content-Length: 2866 >> > > > >> > > > Authors, >> > > > >> > > > We have not heard any further from you regarding this document. We >> > > > would appreciate a confirmation that the document is ready to be >> > > > published as it now appears at: >> > > > >> > > > ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/authors/rfc3289.txt >> > > > >> > > > We will wait to hear from you before continuing on. >> > > > >> > > > Thank you. >> > > > >> > > > RFC Editor >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > From rfc-ed@ISI.EDU Mon May 13 11:51:19 2002 >> > > > > Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 18:50:53 GMT >> > > > > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, fred@cisco.com >> > > > > Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 >> > > > > NOW AVAILABLE >> > > > > Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, >> > > mankin@ISI.EDU, >> > > > > sob@harvard.edu, bwijnen@lucent.com >> > > > > From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >> > > > > X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII >> > > > > X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 >> > > > > Content-Length: 1984 >> > > > > >> > > > > Fred, >> > > > > >> > > > > Thank you for bringing this to our attention. It now parses >> > > > > successfully. >> > > > > >> > > > > We have updated your contact information in the authors address >> > > > > section, as well as within the mib. >> > > > > >> > > > > Please let us know if there are any further corrections required. >>We >> > > > > will wait to hear from you. >> > > > > >> > > > > Thank you. >> > > > > >> > > > > RFC editor >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > From fred@cisco.com Fri May 10 01:03:56 2002 >> > > > > > X-Sender: fred@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com >> > > > > > X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 >> > > > > > Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 16:03:24 +0800 >> > > > > > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >> > > > > > From: Fred Baker >> > > > > > Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 >> > > > > > NOW AVAILABLE >> > > > > > Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, >> > > > > > rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, mankin@ISI.EDU, sob@harvard.edu, >> > > > > > bwijnen@lucent.com >> > > > > > Mime-Version: 1.0 >> > > > > > X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 >> > > > > > >> > > > > > At 10:37 PM 5/9/2002 +0000, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org wrote: >> > > > > > >FYI: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >W: f(rfc3289.mi2), (42,1) Textual convention "Dscp" defined but >> > > not used >> > > > > > >W: f(rfc3289.mi2), (52,1) Textual convention "DscpOrAny" defined >>but >> > > > > > >not used >> > > > > > >> > > > > > these two warnings come up because the TCs are in a separate MIB >> > > Module >> > > > > > from the main mib, and are imported into it. They are fine. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > My contact information has changed slightly; I have a new physical >> > > address. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>/===================================================================== / >> > > > > > | Fred Baker | 1121 Via Del Rey >>| >> > > > > > | Cisco Fellow | Santa Barbara, >>California | >> > > > > > +--------------------------------+ 93117 USA >>| >> > > > > > | Nothing will ever be attempted,| phone: +1-805-681-0115 >>| >> > > > > > | if all possible objections must| fax: +1-413-473-2403 >>| >> > > > > > | be first overcome. | >>| >> > > > > > | Dr. Johnson, Rasselas, 1759| >>| >> > > > > > >>/===================================================================== / >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > >----- End Included Message ----- > _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillis t.html _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Aug 30 02:41:03 2002 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA04963 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 02:41:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7U6gCV10590 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 02:42:12 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7U6S3o09382; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 02:28:03 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7U6Hgo08371 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 02:17:42 -0400 Received: from mail-gw1.hursley.ibm.com (mail-gw1.hursley.ibm.com [194.196.110.15]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA00482 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 02:15:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [9.20.45.103] (helo=sp15en17.hursley.ibm.com) by mail-gw1.hursley.ibm.com with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17kf5X-000D0m-00; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 07:16:59 +0100 Received: from hursley.ibm.com (dhcp23-199.zurich.ibm.com [9.4.23.199]) by sp15en17.hursley.ibm.com (AIX4.3/8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA20126; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 07:16:59 +0100 Message-ID: <3D6F0DF3.F22C55A@hursley.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 08:17:23 +0200 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: IBM X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,fr,de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Smith CC: diffserv@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diffserv] Re: Fwd: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 NOW AVAILABLE References: <00f601c24fce$d19511a0$1400000a@ANDREWLAPTOP> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit We have 2 choices: 1. Republish the RFC now (as Proposed Standard) 2. Simply list the errata on the RFC Editor's errata page. We'll certainly take guidance from the WG as to which is better, so if you have an opinion please give it now. Brian Andrew Smith wrote: > > I'm not convinced that now is the right time to be updating this MIB > and/or the RFC that includes it. Some of Tom Irwin's first set of > comments fix errors but some (and all of his second set of comments) are > clarifications, as were most of mine from May 3th 2002 (below). If we > must, then I'd suggest just fixing the syntax errors in the MIB module. > But don't things like this usually wait for a "natural" refresh cycle > e.g. an attempt to move an RFC to Draft standard? I'd hate to > destabilise anyone's plans to implement the current RFC. We've got > published/archived fixes on the record so I don't see the urgency to > update (other than tidiness). And it's quite likely that we'd be able to > remove 20 pages or more with the benefit of another year or so more > implementation experience. > > Just my thoughts - I don't have any significant stake in any current > implementation plans so it really ought to be up to others to say what > they want done. > > Andrew Smith > > -----Original Message----- > From: diffserv-admin@ietf.org [mailto:diffserv-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Fred Baker > Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 6:35 PM > To: Kwok Ho Chan > Cc: ah_smith@acm.org; diffserv@ietf.org > Subject: [Diffserv] Re: Fwd: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC > 3289 NOW AVAILABLE > > At 07:45 PM 8/29/2002 -0400, Kwok Ho Chan wrote: > >Fred: > >Are you referring to the attached E-Mail? > > yes. I would like all comments edited into the new document to have at > least been seen by the working group. I don't think we'll get a lot of > commentary, but people should have the opportunity. > > >-- Kwok -- > > > >>From: "Andrew Smith" > >>To: "Brian E Carpenter" , "Fred Baker" > >>, > >> "Chan, Kwok-Ho [BL60:470:EXCH]" > >>Cc: , , > >> "Dan Grossman" > >>Subject: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC > >>3289 NOW AVAILABLE > >>Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:20:51 -0700 > >>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) > >>Importance: Normal > >>X-SMTP-HELO: falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net > >>X-SMTP-MAIL-FROM: ah_smith@acm.org > >>X-SMTP-RCPT-TO: khchan@nortelnetworks.com > >>X-SMTP-PEER-INFO: falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.74] > >> > >>I just found out about the "48 hours" today: most of these comments > are > >>probably (way) too late but there are some editorial things buried in > here > >>that might be helpful at this late stage: > >> > >>Please change my contact info: > >> OLD: > >> > >> A. Smith > >> Allegro > Networks > >> NEW: > >> A. Smith > >> Harbour > Networks > >> > >>11. Authors' Addresses > >> > >>OLD: > >> Andrew Smith > >> Allegro Networks > >> 6399 San Ignacio Ave > >> San Jose, CA 95119 > >> > >> EMail: andrew@allegronetworks.com > >> NEW: > >> Andrew Smith > >> Harbour Networks > >> Jiuling Building > >> 21 North Xisanhuan Ave. > >> Beijing, 100089, PRC > >> > >> EMail: ah_smith@acm.org > >> > >> > >> > >>3.5.3. diffServMinRateTable - The Minimum Rate Table: The description > (both > >>here and in the comments in the MIB module and in the DESCRIPTION > clauses) > >>is unclear on when the Rate and when the Priority parameters are to be > used > >>and what is their combined effect: > >> > >> "When the output rate of a queue or scheduler must be given a > minimum > >> rate or a priority, this is done using the diffServMinRateTable. > >> Rates may be expressed as absolute rates, or as a fraction of > >> ifSpeed, and imply the use of a rate-based scheduler such as WFQ > or > >> WRR. The use of a priority implies the use of a Priority > Scheduler. > >> Only one of the Absolute or Relative rates needs to be set; the > other > >> takes the relevant value as a result. Excess capacity is > distributed > >> proportionally among the inputs to a scheduler using the assured > >> rate. More complex functionality may be described by augmenting > this > >> MIB." > >> > >>I thought that the type of scheduler was implied by > diffServSchedulerMethod, > >>not by "use of a priority". And if you're doing strict priority > scheduling, > >>neither of Absolute or Relative rates needs to be set, right? Text > above > >>seems to imply otherwise. See also below. > >> > >>3.5.5 There's no reference to figure 4. Perhaps it should be from the > >>paragraph at the bottom of p18? > >> > >>3.5.5 Is there a way to keep this set of diagrams closer to (in-line > with) > >>the text describing them, or at least, on the same page? I know it > wastes > >>paper/bytes but would add to clarity. > >> > >>3.5.5 I find some of this relatively new text confusing (this is the > first > >>time I've seen it so tell me if I'm too late with the following > comments). > >>Specifically: > >> > >> "For representing a Strict Priority scheduler, each scheduler > input is > >> assigned a priority with respect to all the other inputs feeding > the > >> same scheduler, with default values for the other parameters. > >> Higher-priority traffic that is not being delayed for shaping will > be > >> serviced before a lower-priority input. An example is found in > >> Figure 2." > >> > >>Clearer (or, at least, more accurate) is: > >> > >> "For representing a Strict Priority scheduler, the > >>diffServSchedulerMethod is set to diffServSchedulerPriority and the > >>prededing queue or scheduler feeding this scheduler input is assigned > a > >>priority in its associated diffServMinRateEntry with respect to all > the > >>other inputs feeding the same scheduler (the value of the other > parameters > >>in this entry are irrelevant). Traffic from higher-priority inputs to > this > >>scheduler will be serviced before that from lower-priority inputs. An > >>example is found in Figure 2." > >> > >>Figures 3, 4 and 5: suggest you use more specific labels in some of > the > >>boxes to remove confusion: > >>- figure 3, replace "Rate" with "MaxRate" in each box; > >>- figure 4, put something in the empty boxes e.g. "n/a" or leave them > out. > >>Replace "Shaping Rate" with "MaxRate" - we have no parameter called > shaping > >>rate. > >> > >>3.5.5: suggest you lose the NOTE and its text, just above figure 4, or > at > >>least join it up with the following paragraph. > >> > >>3.5.5: last paragraph should be part of 3.6 really. And glue Figure 6 > to > >>this paragraph for clarity. > >> > >>3.6: change "four AF classes" to "four AF classes, each with 3 levels > of > >>drop precedence or 'colours'". We must be clear that this is just an > example > >>of an AF implementation that chooses to do 4 classes, each with 3 > colours. > >> > >>3.6: Suggest you use the same example scenario for figures 6 and 7 - > it's > >>confusing to use different example scenarios. Figure 7 introduces a > new kind > >>of "hybrid" notation for the first time (we've always gone > left-to-right > >>before, not top-to-bottom - I preferred the former for clarity): I > suggest > >>it needs some words to explain the notation (rhetorical questions: > what do > >>the lines imply when they don't have arrowheads? what are the 2 or 3 > >>different lines exiting from the meters? These are all deducible from > the > >>following text but it's made harder work due to the new notation. BTW, > >>there's an arrow missing out of the back/bottom/right Action box. > >> > >>3.6: suggest you add the "everything else" case that you discuss in > the text > >>to figure 7. > >> > >>3.6.: there's no reference to figure 7 in the text. > >> > >>3.6 and 3.7: actually, I'm not sure why these sections are here in > this > >>document - a few years ago, we took out similar "tutorial" material > and put > >>it in the Model draft. There's nothing in these sections that is > specific to > >>the MIB. The right thing to have in this document is the "translation" > of an > >>example like this into the structures and linkages used by the MIB but > these > >>sections do not help with this. We had such material in draft-09 and > it has > >>disappeared (I'm not saying 3.6 and 3.7 aren't useful material but it > just > >>does not belong in this document) - I think this is a backward step. > >> > >>Anyhow, I'm probably too late to the party with most of these comments > - I > >>should have reviewed it when the IESG last call was in progress (I > didn't > >>realise so much had changed since -09 which was the last version that > I > >>reviewed properly). > >> > >>Andrew > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian@hursley.ibm.com] > >>Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 5:56 AM > >>To: Fred Baker > >>Cc: knichols@packetdesign.com; rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org; Andrew > Smith; > >>Kwok Ho Chan > >>Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC > >>3289 NOW AVAILABLE > >> > >> > >>OK, in view of Kwok's response we can give it another day or say, but > >>then... > >> > >> Brian > >> > >>Fred Baker wrote: > >> > > >> > You may need to make an executive decision here. Andrew and Kwok > are AWOL. > >> > > >> > >Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 19:50:58 GMT > >> > >To: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com > >> > >Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 > >> > > NOW AVAILABLE > >> > >Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, mankin@ISI.EDU, sob@harvard.edu, > >> > > bwijnen@lucent.com, fred@cisco.com > >> > >From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org > >> > >X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII > >> > > > >> > >Kwok Ho and Andrew, > >> > > > >> > >We still have not heard from you regarding this document. Please > let > >> > >us know if there are any corrections required. > >> > > > >> > >We are waiting to hear from you. > >> > > > >> > >RFC Editor > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >----- Begin Included Message ----- > >> > > > >> > > >From rfc-ed@ISI.EDU Thu May 23 16:22:59 2002 > >> > >Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 23:22:45 GMT > >> > >To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, fred@cisco.com > >> > >Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 > >> > > NOW AVAILABLE > >> > >Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, > >>mankin@ISI.EDU, > >> > > sob@harvard.edu, bwijnen@lucent.com > >> > >From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org > >> > >X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII > >> > >X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 > >> > >Content-Length: 3636 > >> > > > >> > >Kwok Ho and Andrew, > >> > > > >> > >Please let us know if the document is ready to be published. > >> > > > >> > >We are awaiting your reply. > >> > > > >> > >Thank you. > >> > > > >> > >RFC Editor > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > From rfc-ed@ISI.EDU Tue May 21 09:25:15 2002 > >> > > > Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 16:24:54 GMT > >> > > > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, fred@cisco.com > >> > > > Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 > >> > > > NOW AVAILABLE > >> > > > Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, > >>mankin@ISI.EDU, > >> > > > sob@harvard.edu, bwijnen@lucent.com > >> > > > From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org > >> > > > X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII > >> > > > X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 > >> > > > Content-Length: 2866 > >> > > > > >> > > > Authors, > >> > > > > >> > > > We have not heard any further from you regarding this document. > We > >> > > > would appreciate a confirmation that the document is ready to > be > >> > > > published as it now appears at: > >> > > > > >> > > > ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/authors/rfc3289.txt > >> > > > > >> > > > We will wait to hear from you before continuing on. > >> > > > > >> > > > Thank you. > >> > > > > >> > > > RFC Editor > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > From rfc-ed@ISI.EDU Mon May 13 11:51:19 2002 > >> > > > > Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 18:50:53 GMT > >> > > > > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, fred@cisco.com > >> > > > > Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 > >> > > > > NOW AVAILABLE > >> > > > > Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, > >> > > mankin@ISI.EDU, > >> > > > > sob@harvard.edu, bwijnen@lucent.com > >> > > > > From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org > >> > > > > X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII > >> > > > > X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 > >> > > > > Content-Length: 1984 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Fred, > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Thank you for bringing this to our attention. It now parses > >> > > > > successfully. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > We have updated your contact information in the authors > address > >> > > > > section, as well as within the mib. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Please let us know if there are any further corrections > required. > >>We > >> > > > > will wait to hear from you. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Thank you. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > RFC editor > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > From fred@cisco.com Fri May 10 01:03:56 2002 > >> > > > > > X-Sender: fred@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com > >> > > > > > X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 > >> > > > > > Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 16:03:24 +0800 > >> > > > > > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org > >> > > > > > From: Fred Baker > >> > > > > > Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 > >> > > > > > NOW AVAILABLE > >> > > > > > Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, > >> > > > > > rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, mankin@ISI.EDU, > sob@harvard.edu, > >> > > > > > bwijnen@lucent.com > >> > > > > > Mime-Version: 1.0 > >> > > > > > X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > At 10:37 PM 5/9/2002 +0000, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org > wrote: > >> > > > > > >FYI: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >W: f(rfc3289.mi2), (42,1) Textual convention "Dscp" > defined but > >> > > not used > >> > > > > > >W: f(rfc3289.mi2), (52,1) Textual convention "DscpOrAny" > defined > >>but > >> > > > > > >not used > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > these two warnings come up because the TCs are in a > separate MIB > >> > > Module > >> > > > > > from the main mib, and are imported into it. They are fine. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > My contact information has changed slightly; I have a new > physical > >> > > address. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>/===================================================================== > / > >> > > > > > | Fred Baker | 1121 Via Del > Rey > >>| > >> > > > > > | Cisco Fellow | Santa Barbara, > >>California | > >> > > > > > +--------------------------------+ 93117 USA > >>| > >> > > > > > | Nothing will ever be attempted,| phone: +1-805-681-0115 > >>| > >> > > > > > | if all possible objections must| fax: +1-413-473-2403 > >>| > >> > > > > > | be first overcome. | > >>| > >> > > > > > | Dr. Johnson, Rasselas, 1759| > >>| > >> > > > > > > >>/===================================================================== > / > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >----- End Included Message ----- > > > > _______________________________________________ > diffserv mailing list > diffserv@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv > Archive: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillis > t.html > > _______________________________________________ > diffserv mailing list > diffserv@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv > Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Brian E Carpenter Distinguished Engineer, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM On assignment at the IBM Zurich Laboratory, Switzerland _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Aug 30 10:20:52 2002 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA18546 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 10:20:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7UELt501690 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 10:21:55 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7UE9co01095; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 10:09:38 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7UDxeo32686 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 09:59:40 -0400 Received: from motgate.mot.com (motgate.mot.com [129.188.136.100]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA17643 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 09:58:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: [from pobox.mot.com (pobox.mot.com [129.188.137.100]) by motgate.mot.com (motgate 2.1) with ESMTP id GAA00534; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 06:59:35 -0700 (MST)] Received: [from noah.dma.isg.mot.com (noah.dma.isg.mot.com [150.21.2.29]) by pobox.mot.com (MOT-pobox 2.0) with ESMTP id GAA19288; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 06:59:34 -0700 (MST)] Received: from dma.isg.mot.com (ma07-0056.dma.isg.mot.com [150.21.30.201]) by noah.dma.isg.mot.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA28760; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 09:56:24 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D6F7988.27285361@dma.isg.mot.com> Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 09:56:24 -0400 From: Dan Grossman X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Smith CC: diffserv@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diffserv] Re: Fwd: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 NOW AVAILABLE References: <00f601c24fce$d19511a0$1400000a@ANDREWLAPTOP> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Why don't we do with the MIB what we did with RFC 2474, 2475, 2597 and 2598: start a draft (can a concluded WG have a WG draft?) that captures clarifications to the MIB? Andrew Smith wrote: > I'm not convinced that now is the right time to be updating this MIB > and/or the RFC that includes it. Some of Tom Irwin's first set of > comments fix errors but some (and all of his second set of comments) are > clarifications, as were most of mine from May 3th 2002 (below). If we > must, then I'd suggest just fixing the syntax errors in the MIB module. > But don't things like this usually wait for a "natural" refresh cycle > e.g. an attempt to move an RFC to Draft standard? I'd hate to > destabilise anyone's plans to implement the current RFC. We've got > published/archived fixes on the record so I don't see the urgency to > update (other than tidiness). And it's quite likely that we'd be able to > remove 20 pages or more with the benefit of another year or so more > implementation experience. > > Just my thoughts - I don't have any significant stake in any current > implementation plans so it really ought to be up to others to say what > they want done. > > Andrew Smith > > -----Original Message----- > From: diffserv-admin@ietf.org [mailto:diffserv-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Fred Baker > Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 6:35 PM > To: Kwok Ho Chan > Cc: ah_smith@acm.org; diffserv@ietf.org > Subject: [Diffserv] Re: Fwd: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC > 3289 NOW AVAILABLE > > At 07:45 PM 8/29/2002 -0400, Kwok Ho Chan wrote: > >Fred: > >Are you referring to the attached E-Mail? > > yes. I would like all comments edited into the new document to have at > least been seen by the working group. I don't think we'll get a lot of > commentary, but people should have the opportunity. > > >-- Kwok -- > > > >>From: "Andrew Smith" > >>To: "Brian E Carpenter" , "Fred Baker" > >>, > >> "Chan, Kwok-Ho [BL60:470:EXCH]" > >>Cc: , , > >> "Dan Grossman" > >>Subject: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC > >>3289 NOW AVAILABLE > >>Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:20:51 -0700 > >>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) > >>Importance: Normal > >>X-SMTP-HELO: falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net > >>X-SMTP-MAIL-FROM: ah_smith@acm.org > >>X-SMTP-RCPT-TO: khchan@nortelnetworks.com > >>X-SMTP-PEER-INFO: falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.74] > >> > >>I just found out about the "48 hours" today: most of these comments > are > >>probably (way) too late but there are some editorial things buried in > here > >>that might be helpful at this late stage: > >> > >>Please change my contact info: > >> OLD: > >> > >> A. Smith > >> Allegro > Networks > >> NEW: > >> A. Smith > >> Harbour > Networks > >> > >>11. Authors' Addresses > >> > >>OLD: > >> Andrew Smith > >> Allegro Networks > >> 6399 San Ignacio Ave > >> San Jose, CA 95119 > >> > >> EMail: andrew@allegronetworks.com > >> NEW: > >> Andrew Smith > >> Harbour Networks > >> Jiuling Building > >> 21 North Xisanhuan Ave. > >> Beijing, 100089, PRC > >> > >> EMail: ah_smith@acm.org > >> > >> > >> > >>3.5.3. diffServMinRateTable - The Minimum Rate Table: The description > (both > >>here and in the comments in the MIB module and in the DESCRIPTION > clauses) > >>is unclear on when the Rate and when the Priority parameters are to be > used > >>and what is their combined effect: > >> > >> "When the output rate of a queue or scheduler must be given a > minimum > >> rate or a priority, this is done using the diffServMinRateTable. > >> Rates may be expressed as absolute rates, or as a fraction of > >> ifSpeed, and imply the use of a rate-based scheduler such as WFQ > or > >> WRR. The use of a priority implies the use of a Priority > Scheduler. > >> Only one of the Absolute or Relative rates needs to be set; the > other > >> takes the relevant value as a result. Excess capacity is > distributed > >> proportionally among the inputs to a scheduler using the assured > >> rate. More complex functionality may be described by augmenting > this > >> MIB." > >> > >>I thought that the type of scheduler was implied by > diffServSchedulerMethod, > >>not by "use of a priority". And if you're doing strict priority > scheduling, > >>neither of Absolute or Relative rates needs to be set, right? Text > above > >>seems to imply otherwise. See also below. > >> > >>3.5.5 There's no reference to figure 4. Perhaps it should be from the > >>paragraph at the bottom of p18? > >> > >>3.5.5 Is there a way to keep this set of diagrams closer to (in-line > with) > >>the text describing them, or at least, on the same page? I know it > wastes > >>paper/bytes but would add to clarity. > >> > >>3.5.5 I find some of this relatively new text confusing (this is the > first > >>time I've seen it so tell me if I'm too late with the following > comments). > >>Specifically: > >> > >> "For representing a Strict Priority scheduler, each scheduler > input is > >> assigned a priority with respect to all the other inputs feeding > the > >> same scheduler, with default values for the other parameters. > >> Higher-priority traffic that is not being delayed for shaping will > be > >> serviced before a lower-priority input. An example is found in > >> Figure 2." > >> > >>Clearer (or, at least, more accurate) is: > >> > >> "For representing a Strict Priority scheduler, the > >>diffServSchedulerMethod is set to diffServSchedulerPriority and the > >>prededing queue or scheduler feeding this scheduler input is assigned > a > >>priority in its associated diffServMinRateEntry with respect to all > the > >>other inputs feeding the same scheduler (the value of the other > parameters > >>in this entry are irrelevant). Traffic from higher-priority inputs to > this > >>scheduler will be serviced before that from lower-priority inputs. An > >>example is found in Figure 2." > >> > >>Figures 3, 4 and 5: suggest you use more specific labels in some of > the > >>boxes to remove confusion: > >>- figure 3, replace "Rate" with "MaxRate" in each box; > >>- figure 4, put something in the empty boxes e.g. "n/a" or leave them > out. > >>Replace "Shaping Rate" with "MaxRate" - we have no parameter called > shaping > >>rate. > >> > >>3.5.5: suggest you lose the NOTE and its text, just above figure 4, or > at > >>least join it up with the following paragraph. > >> > >>3.5.5: last paragraph should be part of 3.6 really. And glue Figure 6 > to > >>this paragraph for clarity. > >> > >>3.6: change "four AF classes" to "four AF classes, each with 3 levels > of > >>drop precedence or 'colours'". We must be clear that this is just an > example > >>of an AF implementation that chooses to do 4 classes, each with 3 > colours. > >> > >>3.6: Suggest you use the same example scenario for figures 6 and 7 - > it's > >>confusing to use different example scenarios. Figure 7 introduces a > new kind > >>of "hybrid" notation for the first time (we've always gone > left-to-right > >>before, not top-to-bottom - I preferred the former for clarity): I > suggest > >>it needs some words to explain the notation (rhetorical questions: > what do > >>the lines imply when they don't have arrowheads? what are the 2 or 3 > >>different lines exiting from the meters? These are all deducible from > the > >>following text but it's made harder work due to the new notation. BTW, > >>there's an arrow missing out of the back/bottom/right Action box. > >> > >>3.6: suggest you add the "everything else" case that you discuss in > the text > >>to figure 7. > >> > >>3.6.: there's no reference to figure 7 in the text. > >> > >>3.6 and 3.7: actually, I'm not sure why these sections are here in > this > >>document - a few years ago, we took out similar "tutorial" material > and put > >>it in the Model draft. There's nothing in these sections that is > specific to > >>the MIB. The right thing to have in this document is the "translation" > of an > >>example like this into the structures and linkages used by the MIB but > these > >>sections do not help with this. We had such material in draft-09 and > it has > >>disappeared (I'm not saying 3.6 and 3.7 aren't useful material but it > just > >>does not belong in this document) - I think this is a backward step. > >> > >>Anyhow, I'm probably too late to the party with most of these comments > - I > >>should have reviewed it when the IESG last call was in progress (I > didn't > >>realise so much had changed since -09 which was the last version that > I > >>reviewed properly). > >> > >>Andrew > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian@hursley.ibm.com] > >>Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 5:56 AM > >>To: Fred Baker > >>Cc: knichols@packetdesign.com; rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org; Andrew > Smith; > >>Kwok Ho Chan > >>Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC > >>3289 NOW AVAILABLE > >> > >> > >>OK, in view of Kwok's response we can give it another day or say, but > >>then... > >> > >> Brian > >> > >>Fred Baker wrote: > >> > > >> > You may need to make an executive decision here. Andrew and Kwok > are AWOL. > >> > > >> > >Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 19:50:58 GMT > >> > >To: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com > >> > >Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 > >> > > NOW AVAILABLE > >> > >Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, mankin@ISI.EDU, sob@harvard.edu, > >> > > bwijnen@lucent.com, fred@cisco.com > >> > >From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org > >> > >X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII > >> > > > >> > >Kwok Ho and Andrew, > >> > > > >> > >We still have not heard from you regarding this document. Please > let > >> > >us know if there are any corrections required. > >> > > > >> > >We are waiting to hear from you. > >> > > > >> > >RFC Editor > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >----- Begin Included Message ----- > >> > > > >> > > >From rfc-ed@ISI.EDU Thu May 23 16:22:59 2002 > >> > >Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 23:22:45 GMT > >> > >To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, fred@cisco.com > >> > >Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 > >> > > NOW AVAILABLE > >> > >Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, > >>mankin@ISI.EDU, > >> > > sob@harvard.edu, bwijnen@lucent.com > >> > >From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org > >> > >X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII > >> > >X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 > >> > >Content-Length: 3636 > >> > > > >> > >Kwok Ho and Andrew, > >> > > > >> > >Please let us know if the document is ready to be published. > >> > > > >> > >We are awaiting your reply. > >> > > > >> > >Thank you. > >> > > > >> > >RFC Editor > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > From rfc-ed@ISI.EDU Tue May 21 09:25:15 2002 > >> > > > Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 16:24:54 GMT > >> > > > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, fred@cisco.com > >> > > > Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 > >> > > > NOW AVAILABLE > >> > > > Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, > >>mankin@ISI.EDU, > >> > > > sob@harvard.edu, bwijnen@lucent.com > >> > > > From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org > >> > > > X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII > >> > > > X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 > >> > > > Content-Length: 2866 > >> > > > > >> > > > Authors, > >> > > > > >> > > > We have not heard any further from you regarding this document. > We > >> > > > would appreciate a confirmation that the document is ready to > be > >> > > > published as it now appears at: > >> > > > > >> > > > ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/authors/rfc3289.txt > >> > > > > >> > > > We will wait to hear from you before continuing on. > >> > > > > >> > > > Thank you. > >> > > > > >> > > > RFC Editor > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > From rfc-ed@ISI.EDU Mon May 13 11:51:19 2002 > >> > > > > Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 18:50:53 GMT > >> > > > > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, fred@cisco.com > >> > > > > Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 > >> > > > > NOW AVAILABLE > >> > > > > Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, > >> > > mankin@ISI.EDU, > >> > > > > sob@harvard.edu, bwijnen@lucent.com > >> > > > > From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org > >> > > > > X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII > >> > > > > X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 > >> > > > > Content-Length: 1984 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Fred, > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Thank you for bringing this to our attention. It now parses > >> > > > > successfully. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > We have updated your contact information in the authors > address > >> > > > > section, as well as within the mib. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Please let us know if there are any further corrections > required. > >>We > >> > > > > will wait to hear from you. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Thank you. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > RFC editor > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > From fred@cisco.com Fri May 10 01:03:56 2002 > >> > > > > > X-Sender: fred@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com > >> > > > > > X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 > >> > > > > > Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 16:03:24 +0800 > >> > > > > > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org > >> > > > > > From: Fred Baker > >> > > > > > Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 > >> > > > > > NOW AVAILABLE > >> > > > > > Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, > >> > > > > > rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, mankin@ISI.EDU, > sob@harvard.edu, > >> > > > > > bwijnen@lucent.com > >> > > > > > Mime-Version: 1.0 > >> > > > > > X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > At 10:37 PM 5/9/2002 +0000, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org > wrote: > >> > > > > > >FYI: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >W: f(rfc3289.mi2), (42,1) Textual convention "Dscp" > defined but > >> > > not used > >> > > > > > >W: f(rfc3289.mi2), (52,1) Textual convention "DscpOrAny" > defined > >>but > >> > > > > > >not used > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > these two warnings come up because the TCs are in a > separate MIB > >> > > Module > >> > > > > > from the main mib, and are imported into it. They are fine. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > My contact information has changed slightly; I have a new > physical > >> > > address. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>/===================================================================== > / > >> > > > > > | Fred Baker | 1121 Via Del > Rey > >>| > >> > > > > > | Cisco Fellow | Santa Barbara, > >>California | > >> > > > > > +--------------------------------+ 93117 USA > >>| > >> > > > > > | Nothing will ever be attempted,| phone: +1-805-681-0115 > >>| > >> > > > > > | if all possible objections must| fax: +1-413-473-2403 > >>| > >> > > > > > | be first overcome. | > >>| > >> > > > > > | Dr. Johnson, Rasselas, 1759| > >>| > >> > > > > > > >>/===================================================================== > / > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >----- End Included Message ----- > > > > _______________________________________________ > diffserv mailing list > diffserv@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv > Archive: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillis > t.html > > _______________________________________________ > diffserv mailing list > diffserv@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv > Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Aug 30 22:30:37 2002 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA12664 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 22:30:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7V2Vkd06269 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 22:31:46 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7V2K6o05909; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 22:20:07 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7V29Zo05678 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 22:09:35 -0400 Received: from sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.163.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA12124 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 22:07:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from FRED-W2K6.cisco.com (stealth-10-32-253-235.cisco.com [10.32.253.235]) by sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g7V28sKC005818; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 19:08:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20020830190836.025d5940@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com> X-Sender: fred@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 19:08:53 -0700 To: "Andrew Smith" From: Fred Baker Subject: RE: [Diffserv] Re: Fwd: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 NOW AVAILABLE Cc: In-Reply-To: <00f601c24fce$d19511a0$1400000a@ANDREWLAPTOP> References: <5.1.1.6.2.20020829183359.04bb0da0@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , At 07:41 PM 8/29/2002 -0700, Andrew Smith wrote: >But don't things like this usually wait for a "natural" refresh cycle >e.g. an attempt to move an RFC to Draft standard? there is at least one thing whihc actually needs correction - a range on a variable. _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html