Subject: RE: [NSIS] New I-D on framework for QoS signaling

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 09:50:48 +0800

Hi,

How about the scalability of your proposed QoS signaling? Must each hop store the state for per-flow traffic?

BR/Kan Zhigang

-----Original Message-----
From: ext Shahrier, Sharif M. [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: 2002年6月20日 21:52
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [NSIS] New I-D on framework for QoS signaling

The following draft is a framework document for QoS signaling for NSIS. We
request that it be considered for working group document.

 <<draft-shahrier-nsis-fwk-00.txt>> 

Sharif.

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

---

From: "Shahrier, Sharif M." <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 16:07:41 -0400

The protocol can be made scalable by combining a group of flows into a
single "aggregate flow"  class, where all the flows in the aggregate set
have the same QoS treatment. In this manner, the need to store state at each
hop for every single flow is eliminated => better scalability.

Another thing that can be done is not to replacate storing those QoS
parameters that are common to some of the flows. Thus, it needs to be stored
only once at each hop. This will also improve scalability.

Sharif.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 9:51 PM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [NSIS] New I-D on framework for QoS signaling

Hi,

How about the scalability of your proposed QoS signaling? Must each hop
store the state for per-flow traffic?

BR/Kan Zhigang

-----Original Message-----
From: ext Shahrier, Sharif M. [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: 2002年6月20日 21:52
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [NSIS] New I-D on framework for QoS signaling

Sharif.

---

From: "Charles Q. Shen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 11:30:09 +0800

Sharif

So is this aggregate flow sent to a single receiver or multiple receivers?

Is there any other major difference of the proposal from original RSVP 
except that routers may need to do two-way reservation based on messages 
passed through?

Thx./Charles

At 16:07 2002-6-21 -0400, Shahrier, Sharif M. wrote:

>Sent: 2002å¹´6æœˆ20æ—¥ 21:52
>To: [email-masked]

---

From: "Shahrier, Sharif M." <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 16:27:01 -0400

1. Could you give an example / scenario of an applications in which the
"Originator" of a service is solely responsible for making the necessary
reservations, authentication and their cost. How will the cost of such a
service be decided?

Voice-over-IP, video telephony, video conferencing.

Cost is determined by the resource requirements of both sender and receiver.

The sender is responsible for the cost.

2. I could not understand how the connection Setup will take place in a
heterogeneous IP network (where there are multiple service providers with
complex SLA's)

Note that the text does not say hetrogenous "IP" network. The hetrogenous
refers to different wireline or wireless technologies, such as CDMS2000,
802.11, WCDMA, GSM. It is envisioned that these networks are interconnected
via the NSIS network.

---

From: "Shahrier, Sharif M." <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 16:40:48 -0400

Charles,

Aggregate flow consists of bundling of a large number of flows that have the
same QoS treatment. At various points, the flows are again separated and
directed to different receivers.

The only difference is the message formats needed to convey reservation
information for send and receive direction simultaneously in the same
message.

Thx./Charles

At 16:07 2002-6-21 -0400, Shahrier, Sharif M. wrote:

>Sent: 2002å¹´6æoe^20æ-¥ 21:52
>To: [email-masked]

---

From: "Charles Q. Shen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 20:33:28 +0800

Fine. So problems and solutions with RSVP may largely apply to this as well.

Charles