[R-C] Effect of ConEx on RMCAT

[Harald Alvestrand]

On 05/24/2012 03:16 PM, John Leslie wrote:
> Harald Alvestrand<harald at alvestrand.no>  wrote:
>> I see that
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-conex-concepts-uses/
>> shows that one document is already in front of the IESG; is this a good
>> starting point to read up on it?
>     I think it's worth reading...
>
>>> I see a clear impact on design choice on how to handle these. I think
>>> we should discuss the impact of ConEx here before the BOF in Vancouver.
>> The list's been relatively quiet for a while, so there's room ... the
>> result of discussion may be "too far out to worry about";
>     ;^)
>
>> my 0.01 read is that Conex expects that it has to be deployed in both
>> ISPs and endpoints before it does any good,
>     That's not a correct read of draft-ietf-conex-concepts-uses, IMHO.
>
>     There is utility in having the expected-congestion visible at nodes
> along the path. There is an expectation that at least one ISP along
> the path will act on it, but it's premature IMHO to say what that
> action may be.
That's what I said, wasn't it?

- has to be at origin, otherwise info won't get inserted
- has to be at destination, otherwise info won't get reflected
- has to be in the middle, otherwise nobody will act on the info

It doesn't have to be at all the ISPs, but at least one ISP. I think.

>
>> while the goal for RMCAT is a function that can be usefully deployed
>> even if it's deployed at the endpoints only.
>     Agreed!
>
> --
> John Leslie<john at jlc.net>
>