Subject: [aqm] WG status

From: Wesley Eddy <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 14:45:59 -0500

Hi, as we've entered 2014 and have charter milestones that we're
working towards, Richard and I thought it would be good to start
periodically sending a "status report" to the WG mailing list so
that we can all keep up with what's going on, and focus our efforts
together on the things that need work.

Towards that goal, here is a snapshot of where we think the AQM
working group is at today, and what the next steps are that people
can contribute to:

- WG Milestones:
  - Submit AQM recommendations to IESG for publication, obsoleting RFC
2309 (Goal: January 2014)
    - draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation is accepted towards this milestone
    - http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation/
    - the draft needs to be updated per comments received, including
feedback on the recommendations from the Vancouver meeting
    - if the authors are comfortable, a WGLC might be made on the next
revision
    - we would like to hear from other authors of RFC 2309 on this
document, if anyone has contacts to them.

  - Submit AQM algorithm evaluation guidelines to IESG for publication
as Informational (Goal: July 2014)
    - We need an editor team to step forward and begin work on this;
there was initial work presented in Vancouver, but no draft available or
adopted by the working group yet.
    - It will be difficult to make this milestone, and will push other
milestones back, if this work isn't accelerated.
    - Please express interest to the chairs or on-list

  - Submit first algorithm specification to IESG for publication as
Proposed Standard (Goal: December 2014)
    - Since any Proposed Standard algorithm should be in line with the
recommendations and be passable versus the evaluation guidelines, this
milestone is hard to start on without significant progress on the
previous two.
    - Currently the only algorithm spec with a complete and active
individual-submission draft is PIE

- Other items:
  - draft-pan-aqm-pie is under active work as a proposed algorithm:
    http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-pan-aqm-pie-00.txt
  - CoDel draft is expired; Dave Taht or others may revive it and/or
describe pairing with FQ/SFQ algorithms:
    http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-nichols-tsvwg-codel-01.txt
  - Other algorithm specifications are welcome!
    - Though, we are not planning on adopting algorithms until
recommendations and evaluation guidelines are mostly stable

-- 
Wes Eddy
MTI Systems

---

From: Dave Taht <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:06:02 -0500

I have a doc shepard/researcher working with me to nail down cites from the
70s and 80s. First up however was finding direct web references to
everything cited in the existing  drafts.

Alaric found links to everything missing and modified the existing drafts
to suit. I don't know how the various authors would like the changes (?) -
diffs can be had from the bufferbloat-rfcs repository in github:
https://github.com/dtaht/bufferbloat-rfcs - there were only about 10 URLs
added.

Still struggling with xml2rfc and pandoc2rfc here...
 On Jan 8, 2014 2:46 PM, "Wesley Eddy" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> aqm mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
>

---

From: Preethi Natarajan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 12:53:25 -0800

>    - Please express interest to the chairs or on-list

Interested in contributing towards the evaluation guidelines draft --
write, edit, whatever else is needed to meet deadline.

Thanks,
Preethi (on behalf of PIE team)

---

From: Naeem Khademi <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 22:02:48 +0100

I'm interested in contributing to the evaluation guidelines draft as writer
as expressed before, although I won't be able to actively work on this
earlier than the second week of Feb'14.

Regards,
Naeem

---

From: David Collier-Brown <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 16:20:33 -0500

I'll have a look and see if I can contribute.  --dave

On 01/08/2014 03:06 PM, Dave Taht wrote:
>
> I have a doc shepard/researcher working with me to nail down cites
> from the 70s and 80s. First up however was finding direct web
> references to everything cited in the existing  drafts.
>
> Alaric found links to everything missing and modified the existing
> drafts to suit. I don't know how the various authors would like the
> changes (?) - diffs can be had from the bufferbloat-rfcs repository in
> github:
> https://github.com/dtaht/bufferbloat-rfcs - there were only about 10
> URLs added.
>
> On Jan 8, 2014 2:46 PM, "Wesley Eddy" <[email-masked]
> <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
>
>     [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>

-- 
David Collier-Brown,         | Always do right. This will gratify
System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the rest
[email-masked]           |                      -- Mark Twain
(416) 223-8968

---

From: "Scheffenegger, Richard" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:19:50 +0000

Preethi, Naeem, David,

thank you for stepping up!

I propose that you start off brainstorming a rough structure for the document, such that the WG can see if all relevant aspects are addressed.

We would like to reserve a large chunk of the upcoming meeting time to discuss this 2nd milestone document, after discussing the latest changes to http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation/ 

Best regards,

Richard Scheffenegger

> -----Original Message-----
> From: aqm [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Preethi Natarajan
> Sent: Mittwoch, 08. Jänner 2014 21:53
> To: Wesley Eddy; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [aqm] WG status
> 
> 
> 
> >there was initial work presented in Vancouver, but no draft available
> >or adopted by the working group yet.