[Bloat] [Ecn-sane] [iccrg] Fwd: [tcpPrague] Implementation and experimentation of TCP Prague/L4S hackaton at IETF104

Bless, Roland (TM) roland.bless at kit.edu
Thu Mar 21 04:49:02 EDT 2019


Am 21.03.19 um 09:02 schrieb Bob Briscoe:
> Just to rapidly reply,
> On 21/03/2019 07:46, Jonathan Morton wrote:
>> The ECN field was never intended to be used as a classifier, except to
>> distinguish Not-ECT flows from ECT flows (which a middlebox does need
>> to know, to choose between mark and drop behaviours).  It was intended
>> to be used to convey congestion information from the network to the
>> receiver.  SCE adheres to that ideal.
> Each PHB has a forwarding behaviour a DSCP re-marking behaviour and an
> ECN marking behaviour. The ECN field is the claissifer for the ECN
> marking behaviour.

That's exactly the reason, why using ECT(1) as classifier for L4S
behavior is not the right choice. L4S should use a DSCP for
classification, because it is actually defining a PHB.


More information about the Bloat mailing list