Subject: [aqm] Spencer Dawkins' Yes on draft-ietf-aqm-fq-implementation-03: (with COMMENT)

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 21:15:02 -0700

Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-aqm-fq-implementation-03: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-aqm-fq-implementation/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

In this text:

   Carrying the matter further, a queuing algorithm may also be termed
   "Work Conserving" or "Non Work Conserving".  A "work conserving"
   algorithm, by definition, is either empty, in which case no attempt
   is being made to dequeue data from it, or contains something, in
   which case it continuously tries to empty the queue. 
   
did you mean that an *algorithm* is empty or contains something? I don't
understand. A work conserving queue, sure.