Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-sipping-overload-reqs (Requirements for Management of Overload in the Session Initiation Protocol) to Informational RFC

[Jonathan Rosenberg <jdrosen at cisco.com>]

I've updated the document with your suggested wording change in REQ 15.

Thanks,
Jonathan R.

Matt Mathis wrote:
> Your rewording looks good.  One minor suggestion for REQ 15:
> 
> <t hangText="REQ 15:"> In cases where a network element fails, is so 
> overloaded that it cannot process messages, or cannot communicate due to 
> a network failure or network partition, it will not be able to provide 
> explicit indications of the nature of the failure or its levels of 
> congestion. The mechanism must properly function in these cases. </t>
> 
>>> I would like to point out that TCP, IP and several other transport 
>>> protocols have evolved in the same direction as I am advocating for 
>>> SIP: the only robust indication that an error has occurred is 
>>> connection failure. 
>>
>> True, and we absolutely need to utilize that. However, I do not 
>> believe this eliminates the utility of explicit congestion indicators, 
>> as ECN provides (for example), as a way to further improve performance.
> 
> Normally ECN only reduces latency.  My usual metric for performance is 
> throughput, which is not generally improved by ECN.  But point taken.   
> And it
> doesn't effect the document.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> --MM--
> 

-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                   499 Thornall St.
Cisco Fellow                                   Edison, NJ 08837
Cisco, Voice Technology Group
jdrosen at cisco.com
http://www.jdrosen.net                         PHONE: (408) 902-3084
http://www.cisco.com
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf