Subject: RE: [Ieprep] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ieprep-packet-marking-policy -00.txt

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 15:05:16 -0700

At 04:55 PM 7/2/2002 -0400, Gunn, Janet NE wrote:
>I am slightly confused.  Are you proposing a mapping between "user class"
>and "traffic class"?

I am proposing traffic classes, and figure that an authenticated user can 
make sure that s/he is in the "committed" portion of the traffic class.

I have yet to see a substantiated argument for user class as a separate 
DSCP, or an internet draft suggesting that a user class should get its own DSCP.

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

---

From: "Gunn, Janet NE" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 00:00:18 -0400

OK.

What, if anything, is the expected relationship between these traffic
classes, and preferential "call admission" treatment?  

It seems (at least on the surface) that a "call" in a traffic class that
requires "committed" bandwidth would have a smaller chance of being accepted
(than a "call" of a traffic class that will accept "non-comitted"
bandwidth).  So we would still need some way to identify "calls" that need
preferential treatment for call admission.  

You seem to be suggesting (and it is certainly the intuititive expectation)
that the ETS traffic class should have more committed bandwidth than
ordinary traffic.  But it has been suggested by someone else that (under at
least some circumstances) Emergency traffic calls should be allowed to drop
MORE packets without dropping the "call".  I guess that is "policy" rather
than protocol, and identifying traffic classes would allow you to do either.

Janet

-----Original Message-----
From: Fred Baker [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 6:05 PM
To: Gunn, Janet NE
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [Ieprep] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ieprep-packet-marking-policy
-00.txt

I have yet to see a substantiated argument for user class as a separate 
DSCP, or an internet draft suggesting that a user class should get its own
DSCP.