Subject: Re: ICMPv6 Rate Limiting Methods: Revised Text (2)

From: "Sellers, Julian P" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:47:13 -0600

From Pekka's text:

        One good way to implement the rate-limiting function is a token
        bucket, allowing up to B back-to-back error messages to 
        be transmitted in a burst, but limiting the average rate of 
        transmission to N, where N can either be packets/seconds or a 
        fraction of the attached link's bandwidth.

From an earlier message from Zachary Amsden:

        It seems to me that "back to back" is ill-defined.  It is highly 
        unlikely that the ICMP error packets will be transmitted with no other 
        transmissions in between, which "back to back" seems to imply.  The 
        burst allowance should probably be defined as "allowing a burst of N 
        packets over Ts seconds", or something along these lines.

Zachary is right--"back-to-back" adds nothing but confusion.  Please remove "back-to-back."

Julian

THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its attachments from all computers.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 10:22:28 +0200 (EET)

>         fraction of the attached link's bandwidth.

Let's rephrase this then, e.g:

        One good way to implement the rate-limiting function is a token
        bucket, limiting the average rate of transmission to N, where N 
        can either be packets/second or a fraction of the attached 
        link's bandwidth, but allowing up to B additional error 
        messages to be transmitted in a burst, as long as a long-term
        average is not exceeded.

(the last line could probably be enhanced a bit more though.)

> Please remove "back-to-back."

Back to back wasn't meant like that, that's right.  

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

---

From: Fred Templin <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 05:59:32 -0800 (PST)

>         messages to be transmitted in a burst, as long as a long-term
 
I didn't mind the "back-to-back" text, but am fine with what
you are proposing here. I must admit that I tried wordsmithing
the text a bit, but could not find a combination that clearly
improved readability.
 
Fred L. Templin
[email-masked]