From slblake@petri-meat.com Wed Jan 6 12:21:21 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pcn@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: pcn@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7D363A694C for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:21:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.397 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PtZzXTxPaq7X for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:21:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from elom.tchmachines.com (elom.tchmachines.com [208.76.80.198]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08E063A694A for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:21:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by elom.tchmachines.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NScNU-0007vx-RK for pcn@ietf.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 15:21:12 -0500 Received: from 65.222.234.3 ([65.222.234.3]) by petri-meat.com (Horde MIME library) with HTTP; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 15:21:12 -0500 Message-ID: <20100106152112.1zg9ayvzks04koog@petri-meat.com> Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 15:21:12 -0500 From: slblake@petri-meat.com To: pcn@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.6) X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - elom.tchmachines.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - petri-meat.com Subject: Re: [PCN] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5696 (1969) X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: PCN WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 20:21:21 -0000 On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 14:58 -0800, Steven Blake wrote: > On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 17:56 -0500, Steven Blake wrote: > > > On Tue, 2009-12-22 at 09:35 +0000, toby.moncaster@bt.com wrote: > > > > Using the terminology forwarded by Lars - I am happy for this to be > > > "Hold for Document Update". > > > > > If you are after WG consensus for all the other PCN errata =20 > reported by > > > Alfred Hoenes (1968 & 1973-1976), I think I would suggest "Hold for > > > Document Update" for all of them. They are all typographical in nature > > > and have no impact on the content of the RFCs... > > > Does anyone in the working group object to this approach? If not (and= I > > don't), then we will move the process forward with this recommendation. > > Note: it's the holiday season, and many people (myself included) > probably aren't checking email frequently. So I plan to wait for > objections until the first week of January. > I haven't seen any objections, so tomorrow I will ask the ADs to "Hold =20 for Document Update" the following errata: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3D5670&eid=3D1968 http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3D5696&eid=3D1969 http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3D5559&eid=3D1973 http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3D5559&eid=3D1974 http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3D5559&eid=3D1975 http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3D5559&eid=3D1976 Regards, // Steve From philip.eardley@bt.com Fri Jan 8 08:02:41 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pcn@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: pcn@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B839C3A6810 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:02:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.657 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.657 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.452, BAYES_05=-1.11, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fobgOXdoB2LJ for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:02:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp2.smtp.bt.com (smtp2.smtp.bt.com [217.32.164.150]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6F043A67F3 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:02:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from E03MVB1-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net ([193.113.197.109]) by smtp2.smtp.bt.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 16:02:38 +0000 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CA907B.FFD621CA" Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 16:02:38 -0000 Message-ID: <4A916DBC72536E419A0BD955EDECEDEC06363C48@E03MVB1-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Edge behaviours Thread-Index: AcqQe/+ldBEd7o6vQsOh618CfwvKdQ== From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jan 2010 16:02:38.0363 (UTC) FILETIME=[FFFD06B0:01CA907B] Subject: [PCN] Edge behaviours X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: PCN WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 16:02:41 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CA907B.FFD621CA Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tom I've lost track of what's happening with the edge behaviours. I guess there's another rev following Hiroshima meeting? I should have time to do a review of something next couple of weeks, but I guess would be better to review a new version? Thanks phil ------_=_NextPart_001_01CA907B.FFD621CA Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Edge behaviours

Tom
I've lost track of what's = happening with the edge behaviours. I guess there's another rev = following Hiroshima meeting? I should have time to do a review of = something next couple of weeks, but I guess would be better to review a = new version?

Thanks
phil

------_=_NextPart_001_01CA907B.FFD621CA-- From tom111.taylor@bell.net Fri Jan 8 10:58:34 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pcn@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: pcn@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D8B03A6817 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 10:58:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.063 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.063 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.370, BAYES_05=-1.11, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.803] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bnDB2IbTpnKK for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 10:58:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from blu0-omc1-s9.blu0.hotmail.com (blu0-omc1-s9.blu0.hotmail.com [65.55.116.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D8AE3A6816 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 10:58:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from BLU0-SMTP28 ([65.55.116.7]) by blu0-omc1-s9.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 10:58:32 -0800 X-Originating-IP: [70.54.11.20] X-Originating-Email: [tom111.taylor@bell.net] Message-ID: Received: from [192.168.2.11] ([70.54.11.20]) by BLU0-SMTP28.blu0.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 10:58:31 -0800 Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 13:58:25 -0500 From: Tom Taylor User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: philip.eardley@bt.com References: <4A916DBC72536E419A0BD955EDECEDEC06363C48@E03MVB1-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net> In-Reply-To: <4A916DBC72536E419A0BD955EDECEDEC06363C48@E03MVB1-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jan 2010 18:58:31.0448 (UTC) FILETIME=[921E0180:01CA9094] Cc: pcn@ietf.org Subject: Re: [PCN] Edge behaviours X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: PCN WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 18:58:34 -0000 Yes, I'll be doing updates. I got a bit behind due to illness before Christmas, but I'm starting to move forward now. philip.eardley@bt.com wrote: > Tom > I've lost track of what's happening with the edge behaviours. I guess > there's another rev following Hiroshima meeting? I should have time to > do a review of something next couple of weeks, but I guess would be > better to review a new version? > > Thanks > phil > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > PCN mailing list > PCN@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn From tom111.taylor@bell.net Sun Jan 10 07:17:46 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pcn@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: pcn@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B15403A67ED for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 07:17:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.924 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.924 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.499, BAYES_50=0.001, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.803, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hN+bP8fdfIFi for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 07:17:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from blu0-omc1-s34.blu0.hotmail.com (blu0-omc1-s34.blu0.hotmail.com [65.55.116.45]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C15673A6783 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 07:17:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from BLU0-SMTP20 ([65.55.116.7]) by blu0-omc1-s34.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sun, 10 Jan 2010 07:17:43 -0800 X-Originating-IP: [70.54.11.20] X-Originating-Email: [tom111.taylor@bell.net] Message-ID: Received: from [192.168.2.11] ([70.54.11.20]) by BLU0-SMTP20.blu0.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sun, 10 Jan 2010 07:17:42 -0800 Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:17:37 -0500 From: Tom Taylor User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: philip.eardley@bt.com References: <4A916DBC72536E419A0BD955EDECEDEC06363C48@E03MVB1-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net> In-Reply-To: <4A916DBC72536E419A0BD955EDECEDEC06363C48@E03MVB1-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Jan 2010 15:17:43.0043 (UTC) FILETIME=[0E475530:01CA9208] Cc: pcn@ietf.org Subject: Re: [PCN] Edge behaviours X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: PCN WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 15:17:46 -0000 Before I reissue the edge behaviour drafts, I'd like to get agreement on what I'd put into them. In Hiroshima we agreed that WHAT would be conveyed would be the measured rates of unmarked, threshold-marked, and excess-traffic-marked traffic (octets/second). This provides flexibility for future usages. For the open issue of WHEN these measurements would be sent and the inter-twined issue of whether measurements would be smoothed, I propose the following: 1) Measurements would be taken over periods of a recommended 100 to 300 ms duration and rates would be calculated at the end of each period. This implies a certain amount of smoothing, of course. 2) No other smoothing would be mentioned. 3) As an optimization, if traffic rates are zero for a given aggregate, the egress node MAY skip sending a report to the ingress node. This leads to a keepalive discussion. One possibility is that reporting backs off from every measurement interval to once a second or so while traffic rates are zero. If there are other means for the ingress node to be assured that the egress node is alive and doing its job, this would be unnecessary. philip.eardley@bt.com wrote: > Tom > I've lost track of what's happening with the edge behaviours. I guess > there's another rev following Hiroshima meeting? I should have time to > do a review of something next couple of weeks, but I guess would be > better to review a new version? > > Thanks > phil > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > PCN mailing list > PCN@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn