Subject: [bmwg] Action Item for DSM Methodology

From: Scott Poretsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 11:47:55 -0400

BMWG-ers,

I had an action item from Vienna to send out the list of test cases to be 
included in the forthcoming DSM Methodology draft.  This is provided below 
for your review and comment.  Please let me know if you think additional 
cases are needed and/or if some of these cases should be broken out into 
multiple cases.

Scott
-------------------------------------------------------------
•       EF PHB
–       EF PHB Forwarding Vector Matches the Expected Vector
–       EF PHB Receives Absolute Priority
–       EF PHB Does not Waste Bandwidth
–       EF PHB Does not  Cause Starvation
–       EF PHB Congestion Avoidance
–       EF PHB Rate-Limiting with Packet Drops (Policing)
–       EF PHB Rate-Limiting with Remarking (Policing)

•       AF PHB
–       AF PHB Forwarding Vectors Match the Expected Vectors
–       AF PHBs are Fairly Treated with EF PHB
–       AF PHB Congestion Avoidance
–       AF PHB Rate-Limiting with Packet Drops (Policing)
–       AF PHB Rate-Limiting with Remarking (Policing)

•        CS PHB
–        CS PHB Forwarding Vectors Match the Expected Vectors
–        CS PHB is Backwards Compatible with IP Precedence
–        CS PHBs are Fairly Treated with EF and AF PHB
–        CS PHB Congestion Avoidance
–        CS PHB Rate-Limiting with Packet Drops (Policing)
–        CS PHB Rate-Limiting with Remarking (Policing)

•        Default PHB
–        Default PHB Receives Best-Effort Forwarding
–        Default PHB Tail-Dropped when Forwarding Congestion Exists
–        Default PHB Congestion Avoidance
–        Default PHB Rate-Limiting with Packet Drops (Policing)
–        Default PHB Rate-Limiting with Remarking (Policing)