Subject: RE: [Diffserv] Re: An apology...

From: Mudassir Tufail <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 10:05:53 -0800

> 
> Istvan Cselenyi writes:
> 
>  > So imargine the situation in a few years when every telephony 
>  > session is moved to the internet (what many of us wishes) 
> and new kind 
>  > of real-time applications are spreading all over...
> 
> telephone sessions will always be so small percentage of overall
> internet traffic that we don't need any signalling for that.  diffserv
> bits in the packets are well enough.
> 
> -- juha
> 

Not clear, curious to know how this is possible. I will appreciate if you
can explain it more.

As per my understanding, just the DiffServ bit in the packets would not be
sufficient. It is regardless of the percentage of telephone traffic (or any
real time traffic) on the internet. Signaling is required to do two
important things: 1) call admission control and 2) resource allocation to an
admitted call. The same is valid, as well, for networks where resources are
policy-managed.

Omar Elloumi wrote:
> One question that come in mind is: do we need resource
> reservation for VoIP traffic in DiffServ networks?
>  

Yes, resource management policy dictates what percentage of total available
resources are to be allocated to a traffic aggregate, say VoIP.
Consequently, VoIP call will go through an admission control. This ensures
that 1) admitted calls get guaranteed QoS and 2) lower priority classes do
not face starvation.

Mudassir
CALY Networks
295 Santa Anna Court        Tel: (408) 730 8800 ext 245
Sunnyvale, CA 94086         Fax: (408) 730 2448 

> _______________________________________________
> diffserv mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv
> Archive: http://www-nrg.ee.lbl.gov/diff-serv-arch/
> 

_______________________________________________
diffserv mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv
Archive: http://www-nrg.ee.lbl.gov/diff-serv-arch/

---

From: Juha Heinanen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 23:32:16 +0200 (EET)

> admitted call. The same is valid, as well, for networks where resources are

i have no problems if my internet customer with a 10 mbps access link is
using 10 % of the link bandwidth for telephone traffic and marks it
accordingly.  of course i'll have access control at the edge to make
sure that they don't send more low delay traffic than the 10 % and there
is absolutely no need for any kind of signaling.

-- juha

---

From: "Masilamany Raguparan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 09:25:20 +0800

> is absolutely no need for any kind of signaling.
What happens the required 10% of the link bandwidth becomes 15% at 10.00am.
IMO, there is no need for signaling at packet level, slower time scale
signaling
needed for programming/reconfiguring the schedulers, buffer managers and
policers.

Regards
Ragu

Masilamany Raguparan
InfoComm Lab, KRDL Singapore
Tel : (65) 874 8541 Fax : (65)774 4998

---

From: Juha Heinanen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 09:40:23 +0200 (EET)

Masilamany Raguparan writes:

 > signaling needed for programming/reconfiguring the schedulers, buffer
 > managers and policers.

10 % was just an example.  15 % would be fine too.  but my point was
that the amount of real telephone conversations is not really growing at
all if you exclude calls made for fax and internet, whereas internet
data traffic is at least doubling every year.  so a couple of years from
now the total amount of traffic from telephone conversations will be so
small as compared to the amount of data traffic that it becomes
negligible.  the internet is thus able to easily absorb the telephone
traffic faster than it can be introduced taking into account the present
rate of voip deployment.

-- juha