Subject: QofIS'2000 - Call for Participation

From: Mikhail Smirnov <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 21:29:11 +0200 (MET DST)

Dear colleagues,

please take a minute to look at the programme of the 1-st
International workshop on Quality of future Internet Services:

http://www.fokus.gmd.de/events/qofis2000/html/programme.html

The workshop is organised by European non-profit Action
COST263 (http://www.fokus.gmd.de/cost263/). I'll be very thankful
if you could help us to disseminate this Call for participation
as appropriate. Many thanks in advance!

We offer 28 carefully selected presentations on 
   Queueing & Scheduling, TCP, flow & congestion control, 
   End to end, Traffic Engineering & QoS Routing, 
   QoS Measurements & Measurement based QoS Mechanisms, 
   Fairness, Adaptation, 
   Traffic Classes & Charging, 
   Resource Utilisation & Performance, 
and
   the whole day devoted to Internet Charging 
   (Architecture, Economics, Network dynamics)
and
   Keynote presentation by IETF Chair Fred Baker,
and
   2 social events.

And all this in the heart of Berlin 25-27.Sept.2000

If you consider attending the workshop please register early at

http://www.fokus.gmd.de/events/qofis2000/html/registration.html

Please note that we accept on-line registrations 
only UNTIL 04.Sept.00 - thanks!

M. Smirnov
COST263 Chairperson
PS. Sorry for any duplication of this message

---

From: demir <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 13:31:30 -0700 (PDT)

Does it make sense to use adaptive end protocols, requesting services
othe than best-effort service, on a QoS-network?

Alper K. Demir

---

From: Daniel Alvarez <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:27:29 -0700 (PDT)

I think it all depends if all of the traffic in the
	network is adaptive.  Even if all of the traffic is
	adaptive (TCP) you might still want to give preference
	to some applications.

	So I guess the answer is yes.  Of course, QOS-network is
	a very broad term, so your results may vary.

dan

---

From: demir <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:46:29 -0700 (PDT)

> 	adaptive (TCP) you might still want to give preference

I agree. However, one can't expect that all traffic in the network is
adaptive. Why does a QoS-network want to give preference to some
applications? To me, preference is other type of service that network
provides. It is the network's responsibility to satisfy applications'
service and police the traffic and take some actions for
out-of-profile traffic (depending on service). Does applications need to
adapt changing dynamics of the network if they are not asking a service
other than a best-effort service? (Am I being too restrictive for
services?)

Alper KI. Demir

---

From: Daniel Alvarez <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 17:33:11 -0700 (PDT)

You need to define your QOS-network.  If you are using
	intserv on a per flow basis adaptation is irrelevant, if 
	your reservation gets through you get what you reserved.
	Adaptation might still be useful in this case if the network
	has bandwidth to spare.
	On the diffserv case there is hopefully some flow 
	aggregation so it would make sense to use adaptivity
	within those flows.

	I think the problem is that best effort traffic in 
	part of the network can be mapped to prefered traffic
	on a different part of the network.  Again, your QOS-network
	statement is too broad without defining what kind of
	services you want to provide.

dan

---

From: demir <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:24:08 -0700 (PDT)

> 	aggregation so it would make sense to use adaptivity
Does it depend on the definition of QoS-network or the service on a
QoS-network? I think It depends on the the service. To me, using
aggregate or per-flow state is architectural decision. I believe the
services provided by the QoS-network will depend on architectural
decisions; yet It is still possible to provide same kind of services on
different arcitectures. I am talking about any QoS-network. If a service
is not stating that service degradition during times of congestion(In
order to support this, I think there is a mechanism that network controls
the load), does it make sense to run adaptive-end-protocols using these
kind of services? Is it acceptable to define a service that states service
degradition during times of congestion?  
I have seen a research on TCP modifications for Diffserv. Does it make
sense? It is still an open researh what kind of services Diffserv will
provide. Let's assume one could define throughput gurantees (I think
network should control the load in order to do that or well/over
provisioned with whatever mechanism). Does it make sense to use any
adaptive-end-protocol for such a service? Moreover, does network need
RED-kind-of queue management algorithm for queues used for this service? 

> 	on a different part of the network.  Again, your QOS-network
How can it be mapped? (I guess in Diffserv with a different DSCP or a
state on the routers). Is it still best-effort service?

Alper K. Demir

---

From: Keith Chow <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 09:06:19 -0400

Personally, I 'd rather not touching TCP.
Then, another possibility will be when your "QoS-network" adapts, it shall be aware
of the upper layer protocol.
Some time ago, I had a draft (draft-chow-diffserv-fbctrl-00.txt, expired) and also
part of my thesis was trying to make diffserv network to adapt.

-- Keith.