Subject: RE: "this is intserv" indicator - useful ?

From: Yoram Bernet <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 11:25:50 -0800

> 2) The diffserv draft by Nichols et al. which is the basis for the
> current discussions defines a default (DE) which would typically
> encompass both today's best effort traffic as well as tomorrow's intserv
> flows. 
	[Yoram Bernet]  This is not necessarily the case. For instance, we
have posted
	drafts which suggest that intserv services can be realized through
the diff-serv network
	by a concatentaion of the appropriate PHB, coupled with admission
control. If this is the case, 
	then it is not necessary to view the world as either diff-serv or
intserv. And - it is not necessary, within 
	the diffserv context, to identify flows as intserv *vs.* diff-serv.
Instead, we envision a mapping
	from GS to 'Premium, or EF' and from CLS to 'Assured' (for example).

	I think that the benfit of this approach, is that it does not
fraction the world into supporting one
	of two protocols or one of two service models. I fear that to do so
would render each service model less
	'standard', less valuable and less likely to succeed.

	Yoram