Ballot for draft-ietf-aqm-fq-implementation
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 03 and is now closed.
Thank you for a clear and well-written draft. I would like to understand the reference of "Weighted Fair Queues" and have that clarified in the draft. It's a technical concern, but I have confidence that the authors and ADs will address it. 1) Sec 2.2.3 refers to "Weighted Fair Queues" as well as "Calendar Queues". Perhaps it is due to a lack in my recent background - but what's described is nothing like Weighted Fair Queuing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weighted_fair_queueing). Do you have a reference for "Weighted Fair Queues" or something else in mind??
In this text: Carrying the matter further, a queuing algorithm may also be termed "Work Conserving" or "Non Work Conserving". A "work conserving" algorithm, by definition, is either empty, in which case no attempt is being made to dequeue data from it, or contains something, in which case it continuously tries to empty the queue. did you mean that an *algorithm* is empty or contains something? I don't understand. A work conserving queue, sure.
Thanks for addressing issues from Gen-ART review.