Subject: [Ieprep] deja vu

From: "King, Kimberly S." <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:39:22 -0500

All,

I think the reason it is difficult to make definite statements about CAC
would work or not is tied to the fact that you don't have a fixed
architecture in mind.  (In fact, you haven't clearly defined the problem to
be solved.)

But, suppose I tell you this:

There is a core network that is super.  It has tons of capacity, extremely
low packet loss, low jitter and low delay.  We will engineer this network
such that if you never exceed amount X of type EF incoming the network from
each inbound link, and assuming some flexible traffic matrix, that these
packets are going to get great treatment 99.9% of the time.  That would
translate into great phone calls.

Now then I tell you this:

You have a bunch of feeder links into this network.  You have to limit the
amount of EF traffic you allow into the core network to be less than X per
link (I can be more general that this too).  You prefer to grant that EF
bandwidth to the most important calls so you install a local version of CAC
and tie it to the VoIP call signaling (either through an "IP PBX" or some
local QoS appliance box that sits at before the access link that does
stateful inspection of calls).  Your CAC can even preempt since it can be
stateful about what the MLPP level of on-going calls.

Okay.  Now, I'll bet this works pretty well, works with pretty much off the
shelf stuff, and so why not go and model it.  Furthermore, for the purpose
of this working group, somebody should really state (in a draft) the general
problem to be solved.  We can look at requirements and then analyze if there
is some gap in existing protocols.  

The question to ask is if it solves your problem, not if it solves it in the
exact same way as it was solved before.  

Kimberly

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