Re: [mpls] Poll for draft on EXP Bits to WG draft

[John Kenney <johnkenney at alumni.nd.edu>]

I agree with Francois and Scott that CoS is too narrow and carries the 
baggage of "service."  I suggest "Traffic Management" field.  Scheduling 
class, drop priority, and congestion notification are all aspects of 
traffic management.  The term traffic management has about the right 
scope; it is broad enough to cover the current usages with the 
additional flexibility contemplated in section 3, but it is narrow 
enough to convey real meaning.

I also support using "field" consistently instead of "bits."

I support making this a WG draft.

John Kenney


Scott Brim wrote:
> On 5/6/08 5:16 AM, Francois Le Faucheur IMAP allegedly wrote:
>   
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am in favor of renaming the "EXP" field.
>>
>> A couple of small points:
>> 	* draft-andersson uses "EXP bits" and "EXP field" and also uses "CoS  
>> bits". For its Diffserv and ECN usage, this fieFrom mpls-bounces at ietf.org  Tue May  6 05:44:30 2008
Return-Path: <mpls-bounces at ietf.org>
X-Original-To: mpls-web-archive at megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-web-archive at core3.amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 883793A6AA6;
	Tue,  6 May 2008 05:44:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: mpls at core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls at core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EE223A6AA4
	for <mpls at core3.amsl.com>; Tue,  6 May 2008 05:44:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.265
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.265 tagged_above=-999 required=5
	tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334]
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 s1aJIjgGz7Ge for <mpls at core3.amsl.com>;
	Tue,  6 May 2008 05:44:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from a2s13.a2hosting.com (a2s13.a2hosting.com [69.39.88.160])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E29B3A69C9
	for <mpls at ietf.org>; Tue,  6 May 2008 05:44:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from adsl-76-208-19-162.dsl.sbndin.sbcglobal.net ([76.208.19.162]
	helo=[192.168.1.100])
	by a2s13.a2hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.68) (envelope-from <johnkenney at alumni.nd.edu>)
	id 1JtMWf-0001iL-Oe; Tue, 06 May 2008 08:44:09 -0400
Message-ID: <482052A6.7080603 at alumni.nd.edu>
Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 05:44:22 -0700
From: John Kenney <johnkenney at alumni.nd.edu>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Scott Brim <swb at employees.org>
References: <C444FDB7.22B7%swallow at cisco.com>	<9BBE6947-02A6-4012-8895-200BB5804FDB at cisco.com>
	<48203A26.60504 at employees.org>
In-Reply-To: <48203A26.60504 at employees.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6
X-A2hosting-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more
	information
X-MailScanner-ID: 1JtMWf-0001iL-Oe
X-A2hosting-MailScanner: Not scanned: please contact your Internet E-Mail
	Service Provider for details
X-A2hosting-MailScanner-SpamCheck: 
X-A2hosting-MailScanner-From: johnkenney at alumni.nd.edu
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse,
	please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - a2s13.a2hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - alumni.nd.edu
X-Source: 
X-Source-Args: 
X-Source-Dir: 
Cc: mpls at ietf.org, Francois Le Faucheur IMAP <flefauch at cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll for draft on EXP Bits to WG draft
X-BeenThere: mpls at ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>,
	<mailto:mpls-request at ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls at ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request at ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>,
	<mailto:mpls-request at ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: mpls-bounces at ietf.org
Errors-To: mpls-bounces at ietf.org

I agree with Francois and Scott that CoS is too narrow and carries the 
baggage of "service."  I suggest "Traffic Management" field.  Scheduling 
class, drop priority, and congestion notification are all aspects of 
traffic management.  The term traffic management has about the right 
scope; it is broad enough to cover the current usages with the 
additional flexibility contemplated in section 3, but it is narrow 
enough to convey real meaning.

I also support using "field" consistently instead of "bits."

I support making this a WG draft.

John Kenney


Scott Brim wrote:
> On 5/6/08 5:16 AM, Francois Le Faucheur IMAP allegedly wrote:
>   
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am in favor of renaming the "EXP" field.
>>
>> A couple of small points:
>> 	* draft-andersson uses "EXP bits" and "EXP field" and also uses "CoS  
>> bits". For its Diffserv and ECN usage, ld is not structured  
>> in bits and instead used as a set of codepoints. So I recommend the  
>> document refers to the old field as the "EXP field" (and not "EXP  
>> bits") and define a new name as "CoS field" (and not the "CoS bits").  
>> RFC3270 and RFC5129 already use "EXP field".
>> 	* draft-andersson proposes the name of "CoS" for the field. This  
>> captures reasonably well its Diffserv usage, but probably not so well  
>> its ECN usage. We should be able to come up with a name that captures  
>> both.
>>
>> Francois
>>     
>
> "CoS" also seems inadequate to me because (1) it's already been heavily 
> used to mean less than we need to mean here, so it will confuse readers, 
> and (2) "service" implies something about end-to-end service which is 
> more than we want to mean.
>
> So now I'm obligated to suggest an alternative :-).  To include ECN and 
> PHB/PSC treatments, perhaps the name could be "Congestion Handling 
> Indication", or simply "Per-Hop Treatment Indication"?
>
> swb
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>   
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls


this field is not structured  
>> in bits and instead used as a set of codepoints. So I recommend the  
>> document refers to the old field as the "EXP field" (and not "EXP  
>> bits") and define a new name as "CoS field" (and not the "CoS bits").  
>> RFC3270 and RFC5129 already use "EXP field".
>> 	* draft-andersson proposes the name of "CoS" for the field. This  
>> captures reasonably well its Diffserv usage, but probably not so well  
>> its ECN usage. We should be able to come up with a name that captures  
>> both.
>>
>> Francois
>>     
>
> "CoS" also seems inadequate to me because (1) it's already been heavily 
> used to mean less than we need to mean here, so it will confuse readers, 
> and (2) "service" implies something about end-to-end service which is 
> more than we want to mean.
>
> So now I'm obligated to suggest an alternative :-).  To include ECN and 
> PHB/PSC treatments, perhaps the name could be "Congestion Handling 
> Indication", or simply "Per-Hop Treatment Indication"?
>
> swb
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>   
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls