[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PCN] AD review: draft-ietf-pcn-baseline-encoding-04



Hi,

this sounds like a reasonable way forward.

Lars

On 2009-8-19, at 11:30, toby.moncaster at bt.com wrote:

My proposed solution (based on the comments over the past 3 days) aims
to do two things, firstly to clarify that PCN is an alternative marking behaviour that Operators can specify for certain DSCPs (without changing the scheduling or other behaviours), secondly it should recommend 1 (or more) DSCPs that are currently suitable and should list what we believe
are the criteria for suitability AND/OR explain what we would expect
needed to happen if people wanted to suggest other DSCPs that it could
apply to (either existing or new ones). This second bit is more thorny
and I am not sure I am best placed to do it. I would welcome any offers
of text for that bit...

The end result will be that we have a doc that really makes no IANA
requests, that suggests a suitable DSCP to apply PCN to initially and
that explains what makes that DSCP suitable...

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature