From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.taht.net (mail.taht.net [IPv6:2a01:7e00::f03c:91ff:feae:7028]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5F1F3CB35; Sat, 24 Aug 2019 10:57:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dancer.taht.net (unknown [IPv6:2603:3024:1536:86f0:eea8:6bff:fefe:9a2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.taht.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 74B7121B1A; Sat, 24 Aug 2019 14:57:24 +0000 (UTC) From: Dave Taht To: ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net, bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2019 07:57:12 -0700 Message-ID: <87h866d31z.fsf@taht.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: [Bloat] non queue building flows ietf draft review. X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2019 14:57:25 -0000 I decided that perhaps it would be best if we tried harder to live within the ietf's processes for calm, reasoned discussion But in trying to review this internet draft... https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-white-tsvwg-nqb-02.html I couldn't help myself, and my review is here: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/hZGjm899t87YZl9JJUOWQq4KBsk If someone could make something constructive out of that, great. It would be good to have a really clear definition of what we mean by sparse, and good definition and defense on our website of the properties and benefits of fair queueing. And I'm going to go off today and try to do something nice for a small animal, a widow, or an orphan. Maybe plant some flowers. Some days it doesn't pay to read your accrued inbox messages. Today was one of them. You needen't read mine either!