Subject: RE: Preemption with MAM RE:

From: Dimitry Haskin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 10:25:38 -0500

Francois,

> 
> It may be that another model which has independent bandwidth 
> constraint + aggregate constraint (this would basically be a 
> hybrid between MAM and RDM) is a reasonable idea; but this is 
> not MAM as it is currently defined.
> 

Incidentally this is exactly what I have been assuming regarding the MAM
model. However I agree this is not reflected in the current MAM
specification(s).

Dimitry

> Cheers
> Francois

---

From: "Geunhyung Kim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 01:23:09 +0900

Dimmtry,

-----Original Message-----
From: Dimitry Haskin [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 12:26 AM
To: 'Francois Le Faucheur (flefauch)'; Lai, Wai S (Waisum), ALABS; Geunhyung Kim; Te-Wg
Subject: RE: Preemption with MAM RE: 

Francois,

In current MAM specification, 
do we have to define the maximum bandwidth such that sum of the maximum bandwidth of each CT should be the link capacity ?

Regards,

Geunhyung

Dimitry