Subject: [tcpm] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-tcpm-dctcp-07: (with COMMENT)

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 18:23:57 -0700

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-tcpm-dctcp-07: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpm-dctcp/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Given the nature of this mechanism, I would have expected some qualitative
analysis of its performance under typical data center conditions, rather than
the somewhat vague descriptions of it being an "improvement." If the cited
literature contains such numbers, I would suggest (a) specifically citing where
such data can be found; and (b) copying a very high-level summary into this
document (e.g., something like: "Under typical data center load conditions,
intra-center transfers of large (muti-gigabyte) files were improved by
approximately 12% over Standard TCP using commodity switches in their default
configuration. See [REFERENCE] for details.")

Please expand the following acronyms upon first use;
see https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt for guidance.

 - L3 - Level 3
 - ECT - ECN-Capable Transport
 - DSCP - Differentiated Services Code Point
 - AQM - Active Queue Management
 - RED - Random Early Detection

---

From: "Eggert, Lars" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 07:20:09 +0000

Fixed in the editors' copy; thanks