Subject: [Sip] RE: Manyfolks draft wording

From: "Alan O'Neill" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 19:29:46 -0500

And that is the problem Gonzalo,

You keep stating that using an e2e protocol guarantees end to end resources
but that is not necessarily true. Only end to end protocol in all
congestable elements assures that. If the e2e protocol has a preprovisioned
core then so can the segmented model..

e2e is not better than segmented per say..

Original Message-----
From: Gonzalo Camarillo
To: Alan O'Neill

Cc: [email-masked]
Sent: 23/03/02 12:55
Subject: Re: Manyfolks draft wording

Hello Alan,

[pAlan O'Neill wrote:> 
> Page 7 top
> 
>             ' Note that the use of the segmented status-type does not
>              prevent bottlenecks in the backbone, only in the access
>              networks.'
> 
> The wording here is inappropriate as it seems to suggest that e2e is
somehow
> different and more to the point better, than local /remote but this is
> clearly not universally true.

I find the wording perfectly OK. Again, you are confusing the QoS
mechanism with the preconditions.

Having local/remote preconditions does not prevent bottlenecks in the
network. It may happen that you have a high bandwidth channel between
both UAs, and it may happen that you have a low bandwidth link in the
middle, but in both situations, this has nothing to do with the
preconditions you use. Your local/remote preconditions do not tell you
anything about the backbone.

Using an e2e reservation protocol ensures you that there are network
resources end to end. If the protocol does not work because it allows
routers to claim that there is QoS when there is not, it is a problem of
the reservation protocol. Not a problem of the preconditions.

The idea of manyfolks is separating the reservation mechanism from the
preconditions. If RSVP (or anu other e2e reservation protocol) does not
work, you should send feedback to its authors, not to the authors of
manyfolks.

Thanks for your comments,

Best regards,

Gonzalo

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments on the application of sip

---

From: Gonzalo Camarillo <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 03:30:44 +0200

Hello,

Alan O'Neill wrote:

> but that is not necessarily true.

as I have already stated, if you think that e2e reservation protocols do
not ensure e2e QoS, you should provide your feedback to a working group
that is chartered to develop e2e reservation protocols. Not to SIP.

The fact is that, when you use e2e reservation protocols, you need
certain information in the signalling plane. This information is
different when you use a reservation protocol only in the accesses. 
Different tags ensure that SIP carries the information needed by the
resource reservation mechanism in use.

If you think that people should not be using e2e reservation protocols
because they do not work, you should address your feedback to the
persons developing network architectures. Not to SIP.

> e2e is not better than segmented per say..

Who said that e2e is better or worse than segmented? They are just
different because they apply to different scenarios. If you think that
one of them is always better than the other, you should address your
feedback to a working group developing resource reservation protocols.
Not to SIP. This way they would not lose their time on something that is
clearly worse than another already existing mechanism.

Regards,

Gonzalo