Re: Hard questions (was: Diffserv PIB approved as Informational RFC)

I concur with Kathie. I think we're at a stage where further
design by committee is not likely to be useful - we need operators
to take what exists and try to build services with it (and that
means, IMHO, very simple service models, with minimal additional traffic
engineering to support service differentiation).

I do expect 3G systems to develop some degree of signalling in support
of diffserv, but that will either get standardised in NSIS or will
be done as a separate exercise.

     Brian

Kathleen Nichols wrote:
> 
> Dan,
> 
> You do have to consider whether these "hard questions" are best
> answered by an IETF working group. It seems that the next steps
> require deployment experience not more standards. There is
> a working group, NSIS, that is looking at developing some
> signaling that may or may not be useful for diffserv-based
> services that require signaling.
> 
> As for PDBs, Brian and I passed the bulk handling PDB on for its
> next revision to be done by Roland Bless and Klaus Wehrle. They
> are renaming it to Lower Effort PDB and did send us a revision
> last week. As the WG is closing this can be submitted as
> an individual draft, thought discussion should probably take
> place on this list. For VW or a jitter delay bounded PDB, my
> original co-authors and I have done quite a bit of work to
> define such a PDB and have also worked with someone else
> on provisioning approaches. We don't currently see a reason to
> take this intellectual property to the IETF. If there's truly
> commercial interest, we shall see.
> 
> Although it has been 3.5 years since RFCs 2474&5 were published,
> it doesn't seem like there's been enough public interoperability
> work or public commerical deployment to warrant a rewrite. Do
> you think there has been and that we are ignoring it?
> 
> Diffserv queuing is available in a wide range of routers, but services
> seem to have been slow to deploy. I would think this is at least
> in part a result of changes in the economy. A crucial component
> that seems not to have gotten the required attention is classification
> or filtering, and that might slow deployment also.
> 
> You correctly note that there are difficult problems that remain in
> diffserv, but it's not clear that they can be solved in an IETF WG.
> So, I would say that we are taking a breather before finishing the
> job and further that the breather is required so we can get some
> experience.
> 
>         Kathie

_______________________________________________
diffserv mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv
Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html