The archive.org option works for me! I considered arXiv.org, but they
seem to demand reformatting, which I am unlikely to get around to.
Thanx, Paul
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 06:46:39PM -0700, Dave Taht wrote:
> I note that archive.org is doing a great job of rescuing broken links
> nowadays with wikipedia, and it's anybody's guess how long ibm will
> last.
>
> But perhaps just starting with an archive.org link would prove a good
> long term solution for the ietf?
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20151003174154/http://www2.rdrop.com/~paulmck/scalability/paper/sfq.2002.06.04.pdf
>
> Dave Täht
> Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software!
> https://www.gofundme.com/savewifi
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Elwyn Davies <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > I'd suggest referencing it as a technical report (since that is how Paul
> > records it on his website) and provide the URL. In the longer term, it
> > could be considered problematic because there is no guarantee what the
> > chances are of this web site remaining accessible for the foreseeable
> > future. One solution would be to reference both and maybe ask Paul if he
> > could get it pubished in IBM's technical reports archive (I would have
> > thought he might have been able to swing this given his position!). If this
> > is done by the time the draft gets to AUTH48, the ref can be updated.
> >
> > For authoritative ruling on this consult the RFC Editor.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Elwyn
> >
> >
> >
> > Sent from Samsung tablet.
> > -------- Original message --------
> > From: Dave Taht <[email protected]>
> > Date: 14/03/2016 21:49 (GMT+00:00)
> > To: Elwyn Davies <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <[email protected]>, General area reviewing team
> > <[email protected]>, [email protected], Brian E Carpenter
> > <[email protected]>
> > Subject: Re: Gen-art LC review of draft-ietf-aqm-fq-codel-05
> >
> > There are presently some issues in the html version with the "s
> >
> > And I vastly preferred that we linked to to public, and much longer
> > version fo Paul's paper on SFQ, rather than the short one behind the
> > IEEE paywall, as is now here:
> >
> > s ] McKenney, P., "Stochastic fairness queueing", in Proceedings. IEEE
> > INFOCOM ’90, DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/INFCOM.1990.91316, 1990.
> >
> > http://www2.rdrop.com/~paulmck/scalability/paper/sfq.2002.06.04.pdf
> >
> > How do we go about citing that rather than the infocom one?
> >
> >
> > Dave Täht
> > Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software!
> > https://www.gofundme.com/savewifi
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Elwyn Davies <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Hi, Toke.
> >>
> >> I had a look through the updated draft and I think it addresses all the
> >> issues and editorials that i identified in my LC review. Adding the
> >> comments on the state diagram is probably OK. I won't push the idea of
> >> capitalising quantum etc. any further.
> >>
> >> In the light of Brian C's note and his exchange with Dave about labels, I
> >> think Dave might add a few words about using the label as a classification
> >> mechanism.
> >>
> >> I don't know if you have had any other comments - check with Martin
> >> whether
> >> he wants you to publish the updated version before the end of last call
> >> since it is the day of the IESG meeting.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Elwyn
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Sent from Samsung tablet.
> >> -------- Original message --------
> >> From: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <[email protected]>
> >> Date: 13/03/2016 12:19 (GMT+00:00)
> >> To: Elwyn Davies <[email protected]>
> >> Cc: General area reviewing team <[email protected]>,
> >> [email protected]
> >> Subject: Re: Gen-art LC review of draft-ietf-aqm-fq-codel-05
> >>
> >> Hi Elwyn
> >>
> >> I have now been through your comments and produced an updated version of
> >> the draft. It is available from here:
> >> https://kau.toke.dk/ietf/draft-ietf-aqm-fq-codel-06.html (or .txt if you
> >> prefer).
> >>
> >> Most of your comments I have just incorporated (variants of), with a
> >> single stylistic exception as noted below. I *think* I managed to cover
> >> everything, but I did this in two sittings, so something may have
> >> slipped through the cracks, I suppose. Let me know if that is the case.
> >>
> >> I believe Dave has replied to most of your other comments, so I won't go
> >> through them again unless you point out something I missed. For the full
> >> diff (of the source document), see here:
> >>
> >> https://github.com/dtaht/bufferbloat-rfcs/commit/0d7f1963cc27d11129bcb5fe2affb90ebc6e67d3
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> -Toke
> >>
> >>
> >> Elwyn Davies <[email protected]> writes:
> >>
> >>> General: It would be helpful to capitalize Quantum throughout (or at
> >>> least from s3 onwards) to emphasise that it is a configured value.
> >>> Likewise Interval and Target parameters. Maybe also Flow and Queue as
> >>> they a defined terms.
> >>
> >> I think this is the only stylistic change I haven't made. I thought it
> >> made it more difficult to read, not less.
>
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
