Pekka, > > [logical components being:] encoding and transport along forward > > path from marker to egress, metering of congestion information at > > the egress, and transport of congestion information back to the > > controlling ingress. > > I'd like to see it explicitly stated that transporting congestion > information in the (metered) IP packets themselves is out of scope. Forward transport of the basic congestion information has to be in scope as Fred has pointed out. Backwards transport needs to be scoped by application scenario - for example, backwards transport via SIP is clearly out of scope for the initial PCN work. OTOH, not specifying how to actually move any of this information around would turn PCN into the moral equivalent an IRTF Research Group, which (IMHO) would be bad - at the end of the day, PCN needs to produce something that actually works (need "running code" in addition to "rough consensus"). Thanks, --David ---------------------------------------------------- David L. Black, Senior Technologist EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA 01748 +1 (508) 293-7953 FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786 black_david@xxxxxxx Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754 ---------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf