--- 1/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ieee-802-11-08.txt 2017-09-18 22:13:07.547653746 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ieee-802-11-09.txt 2017-09-18 22:13:07.619655470 -0700 @@ -1,19 +1,19 @@ Transport Working Group T. Szigeti Internet-Draft J. Henry Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems -Expires: March 19, 2018 F. Baker - September 15, 2017 +Expires: March 22, 2018 F. Baker + September 18, 2017 Diffserv to IEEE 802.11 Mapping - draft-ietf-tsvwg-ieee-802-11-08 + draft-ietf-tsvwg-ieee-802-11-09 Abstract As internet traffic is increasingly sourced-from and destined-to wireless endpoints, it is crucial that Quality of Service be aligned between wired and wireless networks; however, this is not always the case by default. This document specifies a set of Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) to IEEE 802.11 User Priority (UP) mappings to reconcile the marking recommendations offered by the IETF and the IEEE so as to maintain consistent QoS treatment between wired and @@ -27,21 +27,21 @@ Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." - This Internet-Draft will expire on March 19, 2018. + This Internet-Draft will expire on March 22, 2018. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents @@ -1492,21 +1492,21 @@ Finally, it should be noted that the recommendations put forward in this document are not intended to address all attack vectors leveraging QoS marking abuse. Mechanisms that may further help mitigate security risks of both wired and wireless networks deploying QoS include strong device- and/or user-authentication, access- control, rate limiting, control-plane policing, encryption and other techniques; however, the implementation recommendations for such mechanisms are beyond the scope of this document to address in detail. Suffice it to say that the security of the devices and networks implementing QoS, including QoS mapping between wired and - wireless networks, SHOULD be considered in actual deployments. + wireless networks, merits consideration in actual deployments. 9. Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank David Black, Gorry Fairhurst, Ruediger Geib, Vincent Roca, Brian Carpenter, David Blake, Cullen Jennings, David Benham and the TSVWG. The authors also acknowledge a great many inputs, notably from David Kloper, Mark Montanez, Glen Lavers, Michael Fingleton, Sarav Radhakrishnan, Karthik Dakshinamoorthy, Simone Arena, Ranga Marathe,