Subject: Re: [PCN] Last Call: <draft-ietf-pcn-cl-edge-behaviour-08.txt> (PCN Boundary Node Behaviour for the Controlled Load (CL) Mode of Operation) to Informational RFC

From: Tom Taylor <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 10:48:45 -0400

Through confusion, I have perpetrated a major screw-up regarding this 
document and its companion, draft-ietf-pcn-sm-edge-behaviour. Somewhere 
around Christmas I received a number of comments on the two documents. I 
have fixed all of them except the comment requesting sections on 
operations and management considerations sections. I am wishing now that 
I had submitted interim updates reflecting that work, pending completion 
of the new sections.

For various reasons I haven't had the time or energy to finish the job. 
When our AD came out with a revised set of comments I was confused and 
failed to respond. At first when Last Call was issued I thought this 
would do no real harm, since many of the fixes were really just 
editorial. Unfortunately, now that I look over some of the reviews, I 
realize that some substantive fixes were also included.

As a result, I have wasted the time of a lot of people. I apologize to 
the community for this. What I propose is that I submit the documents 
with the fixes that were carried out, and the IESG restart the Last Call 
process. Failing that, I will go through and identify the substantive 
issues that need correction in any event.

I note the discomfort with using the EXP code point. This is indirectly 
a matter of extensive debate in the PCN WG. My own view is that the 
solution is as suggested, make the CL-edge-behaviour draft Experimental 
rather than Informational.

Tom Taylor, Editor

On 27/05/2011 4:38 PM, The IESG wrote:
>
> The IESG has received a request from the Congestion and Pre-Congestion
> Notification WG (pcn) to consider the following document:
> - 'PCN Boundary Node Behaviour for the Controlled Load (CL) Mode of
>     Operation'
>    <draft-ietf-pcn-cl-edge-behaviour-08.txt>  as an Informational RFC
>
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> [email-masked] mailing lists by 2011-06-10. Exceptionally, comments may be
> sent to [email-masked] instead. In either case, please retain the
> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>
> Abstract
>
>
> Pre-congestion notification (PCN) is a means for protecting the
> quality of service for inelastic traffic admitted to a Diffserv
> domain.  The overall PCN architecture is described in RFC 5559.  This
> memo is one of a series describing possible boundary node behaviours
> for a PCN-domain.  The behaviour described here is that for a form of
> measurement-based load control using three PCN marking states, not-
> marked, threshold-marked, and excess-traffic-marked.  This behaviour
> is known informally as the Controlled Load (CL) PCN-boundary-node
> behaviour.
>
>
>
> The file can be obtained via
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pcn-cl-edge-behaviour/
>
> IESG discussion can be tracked via
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pcn-cl-edge-behaviour/
>
>
> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PCN mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn
>
>