[ipv6-wg] Latest draft for RIPE554-bis
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Latest draft for RIPE554-bis
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Latest draft for RIPE554-bis
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tim Chown
Tim.Chown at jisc.ac.uk
Fri Nov 26 10:55:25 CET 2021
> On 25 Nov 2021, at 20:01, Jan Zorz - Go6 <jan at go6.si> wrote: > > On 25/11/2021 16:20, Tim Chown wrote: >>> On 25 Nov 2021, at 14:57, Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 6:46 AM Tim Chown <Tim.Chown at jisc.ac.uk> wrote: >>>> >>>> It’s in 4.4 (routers and L3 switches). Does it need to be in 4.1, Hosts? >>> >>> I'd like it to be available everywhere. :) >> >> Well, perhaps the first step here is the mention of AQM for L3 switches and routers. >> >> It sounds like CPEs too, before hosts. > > I thought that in RIPE554 (and -bis) we are defining IPv6 requrements :) > > I would suggest to limit this particular discussion in just refreshing RIPE554, > reach the consensus, publish it, open a champagne, celebrate and next morning > start working on expanded version where we can discuss all the suggestions for > new types of "devices" and all this new additions. We do however have QoS requirements in RIPE554, e.g. in 4.4 and 4.5 there is Mandatory support for QoS [RFC2474, RFC3140] and two Optional items (QOS) Assured Forwarding [RFC2597] (QOS) Expedited Forwarding [RFC3246], So adding (QOS) Active Queue Management support [RFC7567] as optional is not a stretch, for 4.4 or for 4.7. That’s what the current snapshot includes. Tim
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Latest draft for RIPE554-bis
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Latest draft for RIPE554-bis
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]