Subject: [IPTEL] [SIP] RE: PROPOSED JOINT ACTIVITY ON A GENERIC PROTOCOL MECHANISM FOR E ND-TO-END QOS SERVICE CONTROL

From: Bob Braden <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 23:39:17 GMT

*> From [email-masked]  Wed May 30 14:59:58 2001
  *> From: "Roy, Radhika R, ALCTA" <[email-masked]>
  *> To: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
  *> Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked],
  *>    [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked],
  *>    Yukio Hiramatsu
  *> 	 <[email-masked]>, [email-masked],
  *>    [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
  *> Subject: RE: PROPOSED JOINT ACTIVITY ON A GENERIC PROTOCOL MECHANISM FOR E
  *> 	ND-TO-END QOS SERVICE CONTROL
  *> Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 17:21:14 -0400
  *> MIME-Version: 1.0
  *> 
  *> Hi, Everyone:
  *>  
  *> Question Q.F/16 of ITU-T SG16 is fully dedicated for developing standards
  *> for "End-to-End QOS for Multimedia Applications". Contributions are also
  *> being under discussion in the ITU-T SG16 Brazil May 28 - June 8, 2001
  *> meeting.

This is very confusing.   "End-to-End QOS for Multimedia Applications"
is an really important topic, but this topic must be a superset of
"End-to-End QOS signaling".  There are much harder problems than
signaling in providing E2E QoS.  Can you explain how signaling relates
to the title of this working party?

Thanks,

Bob Braden

  *>  
  *> Applications like H.323, SIP, H.324, H.310, and others will also be able to
  *> use this Q.F/16's QOS signaling protocol. MEGACO/H.248 and BICC will also be
  *> able to use this when specs are fully developed and, TIPHON's QOS mechanisms
  *> can also be used as one of the mechanisms for implementations.

_______________________________________________
This list is for continuing development of the SIP protocol.
The sip-implementor's list is the place to discuss implementation,
and to receive advice on understanding existing sip.
To subscribe to it, send mail to 
[email-masked] with "subscribe" in the body.

_______________________________________________
IPTEL mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.bell-labs.com/mailman/listinfo/iptel

---

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 10:09:10 -0700

At 06:08 AM 5/31/2001, Roy, Radhika R, ALCTA wrote:
 >All applications (e.g., H.323, SIP) uses signaling messages
 >among its functional entities (e.g., terminal, agents,
 >gatekeepers, proxies, gateways) for communications.

I'm not sure we're on the same planet. Please help me out here.

I can think of a few applications that have agents, gatekeepers, proxies, 
and gateways, mostly resulting from the imposition of firewalls or 
authentication systems, or from legacy applications like imitating the 
telephone system in a data network. The only one that *requires* any kind 
of gateway, to my knowledge, is H.323 teleconferencing, which represents a 
paltry fraction of traffic according to most current measurements. Anything 
else (75% of Internet traffic is http or FTP, most of the rest is mail, on 
private LANs applications like NFS are pretty common, and even SIP can be 
done without a gateway between consenting systems) could be hooked up in 
separate systems on a LAN and made to work without any such signalling at all.

Could you be more specific on what QoS signalling is required by the world 
wide web, mail, FTP, common ERP applications like ERP and PeopleSoft, 
calendaring, and so on? If not, could you be more specific about what "all" 
applications you have in mind?

And could you be more specific about what issues this proposal is 
addressing that have not already been addressed in de facto standards and 
deployed in operational systems? It would be very nice to understand what 
you are preparing to ask vendors to do, and whether operators are 
interested in deploying them.

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping

---

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 10:09:10 -0700