Subject: [ippm] Adrian Farrel's No Objection on draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-09: (with COMMENT)

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2015 09:42:23 -0800

Adrian Farrel has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-09: No Objection

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 http://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:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem/

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

I have no objection to the publication of this document, but I did
have one observation:

Although section 2 has discussion of the variation of a number of
fields and specifically includes...

   o  Transport protocol (e.g. where TCP packets may be routed
      differently from UDP)

...I was surprised to find no mention of ECMP and the consequences that
it may introduce for the reliability of rate measurement figures.

---

From: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2015 16:24:17 -0500

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:[email-masked]]
...
> it may introduce for the reliability of rate measurement figures.

Good point, I suggest to insert the new/second sentence in the introductory
paragraph to the list you refer to:

There are several aspects of Type-P where user traffic may be examined 
and selected for special treatment that may affect transmission rates. 
*Various aspects of Type-P are known to influence Equal-Cost Multi-Path (ECMP) routing
with possible rate measurement variability across parallel paths.*
Without being exhaustive, the possibilities include:
...

regards,
Al