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

[Danny McPherson <danny at tcb.net>]

On May 6, 2008, at 6:44 AM, John Kenney wrote:

> 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 agree with the above, which can be worked out in
subsequent revisions, and also support as WG draft.

-danny

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls