For other guidelines, i.e., (2), (5), (6), and (7), the author
must perform the suggested evaluations and provide recommended
analysis. Evidence that
the proposed mechanism has significantly more problems than those of
TCP should be a cause for concern in approval for widespread
deployment in the global Internet.
Looks OK to me. I have incorporated it, modulo comments from Sally.
As for the non-BE stuff: This document is a no-op. But, why is that an
issue? The IETF would have to grapple with the non-BE case just as it
does today (i.e., without a set of guidelines). This one document does
not need to solve all the world's problems. If you want to write a
document about how the IETF should handle non-BE congestion control
proposals, I think that'd be fine. And, again, I am not hearing outcry
on this point so I think the document is fine (even if the consensus on
this one point is not completely 'smooth').
Thanks,
allman
pgpKapkMatYwS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf