Re: [PCN] I-D Action:draft-ietf-pcn-marking-behaviour-00.txt

[<philip.eardley at bt.com>]

Please can a 3168 expert answer this comment from Michael. I think the
text may have come from bob (or I mangled his text)/
thanks 
{ ===================================================
{ 
{ 
{ [RFC3168] ... ; this document defines such an alternative.
{ Disagree: PCN marking is not intended to be delivered to end systems
and
{ is, therefore, it is not an alternative RED-like default congestion
{ marking. The only commonality between RED-like marking and
{ threshold/excess marking is that they re-mark the same codepoints.
{ 
{ ===================================================

the text appears in the Intro & in full is
[RFC3168]
   defines a broadly RED-like default congestion marking behaviour, but
   allows alternatives to be defined; this document defines such an
   alternative.

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