{
  "draft": "draft-floyd-tsvwg-besteffort-04",
  "doc_id": "RFC5290",
  "title": "Comments on the Usefulness of Simple Best-Effort Traffic",
  "authors": [
    "S. Floyd",
    "M. Allman"
  ],
  "format": [
    "TEXT",
    "HTML"
  ],
  "page_count": "20",
  "pub_status": "INFORMATIONAL",
  "status": "INFORMATIONAL",
  "source": "INDEPENDENT",
  "abstract": "This document presents some observations on \"simple best-effort traffic\", defined loosely for the purposes of this document as Internet traffic that is not covered by Quality of Service (QOS) mechanisms, congestion-based pricing, cost-based fairness, admissions control, or the like.  One observation is that simple best-effort traffic serves a useful role in the Internet, and is worth keeping.  While differential treatment of traffic can clearly be useful, we believe such mechanisms are useful as *adjuncts* to simple best- effort traffic, not as *replacements* of simple best-effort traffic.  A second observation is that for simple best-effort traffic, some form of rough flow-rate fairness is a useful goal for resource allocation, where \"flow-rate fairness\" is defined by the goal of equal flow rates for different flows over the same path.  This memo provides information for the Internet community.",
  "pub_date": "July 2008",
  "keywords": [
    "flow-rate fairness"
  ],
  "obsoletes": [],
  "obsoleted_by": [],
  "updates": [],
  "updated_by": [],
  "see_also": [],
  "doi": "10.17487/RFC5290",
  "errata_url": null
}