A swag at the Latency Controls "Rush Delivery" policy
In the Latency Target Recipe Example (see 5 August posting to this reflector), a “Rush Delivery” policy is proposed, but its definition is left as an exercise for the reader. The general notion is that all existing policy definitions essentially declare defeat when a latency target is not met, but this conflicts with the I/O Prioritization ideas from the October 2018 Face-to-Face which suggest that “try harder” needs some representation amongst the policies.
This posting is intended to open a discussion whose result will be input to the standardization of a “try harder” policy. FWIW The factors that motivate this initial proposal are:
Within these guidelines, a first-pass definition of “Rush Delivery” uses the latency target as follows.
Before I work to standardize the above concept, I’d like to hash out details with the participants on this reflector. Don’t hold back with your comments. I have a well-deserved reputation for chomping at the bit when it comes to writing proposals for standards.
All the best,