Subject: RE: [Ieprep] access links

From: "King, Kimberly S." <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 18:37:58 -0500

An said:
>The problem with this is that you don't know the locations where
>emergency occurs  in advance. You can't provision your access links
>everywhere around the country. And that is not at all cost effective. 
>If there is no way of differentiating traffic, then the best effort
>traffic is best effort.

I read this statement as best effort transport is sufficient due to the
infeasibility of providing anything different.  

Those apposing the statement, please provide a feasible alternative.

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

---

From: Dean <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 21:37:57 -0500

Here is a document which is showing some analysis on codec and
packetloss.

http://www.globalipsound.com/newsroom/white_papers/gips_evaluation.pdf

Dean
[email-masked]

===============================================
I like to share my ignorance. I have enough.

---

From: Henning Schulzrinne <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 09:11:48 -0500

> Those apposing the statement, please provide a feasible alternative.

It is pretty clear that there are alternatives. The alternatives may not 
be deployed, due to engineering trade-offs or may only be feasible in 
certain parts of the network (generally, access links). As has been 
noted before, like all tools, one has to select the appropriate area of 
application. What may be helpful for a T1 link may be deadly for an 
OC-192 backbone link. For example, IntServ and DiffServ may not scale or 
may operationally infeasible in a backbone network. This says little 
about a link controlled by a single organization. This should all be 
patently obvious, but we seem to go in circles of "I don't need it, so 
nobody needs it" or "I think I need it, so everybody needs to do it".

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk652/tk698/technologies_tech_note09186a0080094660.shtml
http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2002/129521_01-28-2002.html
http://www.sprintlink.net/faq/CoS_FAQ.htm  (Sprint access link 
prioritization)
http://www.juniper.net/techcenter/techpapers/200011-05.html
http://www.bcr.com/access/2000/03/p20s1.asp
http://newsroom.cisco.com/dlls/ts_092702.html
http://www.fcw.com/fcw/articles/2000/0918/tec-voip-09-18-00.asp (Navy VoIP)
http://www.networking.ibm.com/voice/integration.html
http://www1.avaya.com/enterprise/whitepapers/r300cisco.pdf
http://www.oecd.org/pdf/M00003000/M00003121.pdf (QoS mentioned by a 
provider - must be marketing :-))
http://www.genuity.com/announcements/news/press_release_20021023-01.xml 
("Genuity Inc., a leading provider of enterprise Internet Protocol (IP) 
networking services, today announced the availability of its Quality of 
Service (QoS) offering, a managed solution that enhances the performance 
of high-speed Internet access. This new Differentiated Services-based 
(DiffServ) QoS solution allows an enterprise to prioritize the delivery 
of voice, data, and interactive media traffic between its physical 
office locations that are connected to Genuity's IP-based network.")

are random Google-induced examples that are not academic. From a quick 
read, all of them, except possibly the Genuity example, are either for 
access links or VPNs. This is a pretty random selection, so my apologies 
if I left out your favorite equipment or service provider.

---

From: RJ Atkinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 19:44:17 -0500

On Thursday, Nov 14, 2002, at 09:11 America/Montreal, Henning  
Schulzrinne wrote:
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk652/tk698/ 
> technologies_tech_note09186a0080094660.shtml

I've read most of them.  I've followed up in detail with eng/ops folks
on most of them (Genuity is new enough that I haven't reached any  
closure
either way on that one).  So far, what I'm being told is that the  
marketing
is more substantial than the reality in most of the above URLs.

And if someone from Genuity is listening, it would be nice if you'd talk
with the chairs of IEprep about making a specific clear detailed  
technical
presentation on what you've done, how the deployment went, and what the
ops experience/costs are.

Ran

---

From: Scott Bradner <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 20:01:43 -0500 (EST)

> ops experience/costs are.

please - that would be helpful

Scott

---

From: David Meyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 21:03:00 -0800

>> please - that would be helpful

And what the opex buys you.

Dave