[Diffserv-interest] Re: draft-baker-diffserv-basic-classes-01.txt

[Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>]

John, I guess your comment refers to the draft so I changed the subject.

If you want to be sure the authors see your comments, you might want to
write to them directly. My reactions inserted below.

   Brian

"John H. Shuler" wrote:
> 
> Why make a distinction between "Standard Service Class" and "Low Priority
> Data"?

There is a kitchen sink aspect to this draft that worries me. Rather than
starting simple, with three or four generic service classes, the authors
have chosen to present the union of a number of diffserv deployment models.
I think that risks confusing operators by giving them too much complexity
to choose from.

> 
> In fact, it seems the most useful outcome of this paper is to help service
> providers standardize across and between their networks as to service class
> treatment for different service types. For this reason, it seems the best
> thing to do is, rather than to create these semi-artificial classes and
> sub-classes, to get quite specific about how to mark each specific service,
> e.g. IP telephony, SNA, HTTP, FTP, unidirectional video, interactive
> multimedia, etc. You have gone part of the way to this goal, but have put
> what seems to be an artificial middle step into the process... These service
> classes. I can see why you would do this in an attempt to consolidate the
> classes for ease of management, but by the time you are done, you have so
> many classes and variations that you have defeated this purpose anyway. And
> the net goal of standardizing treatment across the network is still not
> achieved because of the multiple options for several of the services.

Exactly.
> 
> Just some thoughts on a single, careful reading.
> 
> Also, there is some dumb editorial stuff:
> (1) Do a lookup for the word "respectfully" and make sure you don't really
> mean "respectively".
> (2) Look up "sufficed" and replace with "sufficient".
> (3) You also have a tendency to use "which" instead of "that"
> (4) There is an instance of using "then" instead of "than".
> 
> Sorry I'm too lazy to be specific about where (it's late).
> 
> j
> --
> Jay Shuler
> President
> Beyond Category Consulting
> 4020 Halkins Drive
> San Jose, CA 95124
> (408) 582-3682
> Jay@BeyondCategory.US
> www.BeyondCategory.US
> 
> > From: diffserv-interest-request@ietf.org
> > Reply-To: diffserv-interest@ietf.org
> > Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 12:00:04 -0500
> > To: diffserv-interest@ietf.org
> > Subject: Diffserv-interest digest, Vol 1 #104 - 2 msgs

<snip>

_______________________________________________
Diffserv-interest mailing list
Diffserv-interest@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv-interest