Subject: RE: [Ieprep] draft-ietf-ieprep-requirements-00.txt

From: "Folts, Harold" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 10:11:52 -0400

> -----Original Message-----
> From: senthil ayyasamy [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Friday, June 28, 2002 8:56 PM
> To: RJ Atkinson; ieprep
> Subject: Re: [Ieprep] draft-ietf-ieprep-requirements-00.txt
> 
> Some of the relevant issues:
> - At emergency times,if in some case,expected load
> exceeds the backbone capacity,how quickly you can
> increase the backbone capacity.
>    If you cannot bring the network to normality within
> a short time scale,one have to go for QoS /traffic
> engineering options.
> 
> Also,remember we are trying to give priority to
> emergency traffic and not create a robust network
> which will be a answer to all sort of congestion
> problems.
> 
> - Access has the only option of using QoS to
> prioritize emergency traffic.
> 
> - one should have a effective co-operation between
> service providers to accomodate emergency traffic.This
> can be addressed by means of peering or service level agreements only.
> 

These are important points that must be taken into consideration.

Overprovisioning is not the single solution. As previsously pointed out in
another email to the list, not all networks are over provisioned. Lots of
unused bandwidth is widely available so it does not cost any more at the
moment to use it for over provisioning. But as traffic demand in the
marketplace increases over time, the excess bandwidth will soon disappear.
Then it may not be cost effective to expand bandwidth just for over
provisioning.

Ensuring that emergency recovery communications can get through heavy
congestion in timely response to a serious disaster is critically important.

Hal

_______________________________________________
Ieprep mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep