Opened 8 years ago

Closed 8 years ago

Last modified 8 years ago

#13 closed defect (fixed)

Users that don't back off (3.1)

Reported by: acooper@… Owned by: draft-ietf-conex-abstract-mech@…
Priority: minor Milestone:
Component: concepts-uses Version:
Severity: - Keywords:
Cc:

Description

From Mirja:

In 3.1. Use Case Description
"Those users would be expected to react in the typical way to drops,

backing off (assuming use of standard TCP), and thereby lowering
their congestion-volumes back within the quota limits."

If those users would use standard TCP, they would have reacted already on the
original congestion signal (before a policer can drop anything based on
ConEx?). I though the point is that this mechanism is helpful when a users
does e.g. not back off on congestion.

Change History (2)

comment:1 Changed 8 years ago by acooper@…

  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from new to closed

I think the point is that it can be helpful in either situation, and this example implicitly assumes that the behavior that triggers policing is, e.g., a p2p user with many open flows but using standard TCP. In the scenario described, indeed the users whose packets get dropped by the policer will have backed off in response to congestion, but the point is to get them to back off more, because they have more flows and are therefore congesting the link more than others.

Since this is just an example, I don't think we need to exhaustively list all the effects of the policer. I suggest the following edit to the sentence above to make the text a little more clear:

s/expected/likely/

comment:2 Changed 8 years ago by acooper@…

  • Component changed from abstract-mech to concepts-uses
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.