draft-ietf-tsvwg-admitted-realtime-dscp-02.txt		draft-ietf-tsvwg-admitted-realtime-dscp-03.txt
	Transport Working Group F. Baker		Transport Working Group F. Baker
	Internet-Draft J. Polk		Internet-Draft J. Polk
	Updates: 4542,4594 Cisco Systems		Updates: 4542,4594 Cisco Systems
	(if approved) M. Dolly		(if approved) M. Dolly
	Intended status: Best Current AT&T Labs		Intended status: Best Current AT&T Labs
	Practice November 16, 2007		Practice December 14, 2007
	Expires: May 19, 2008		Expires: June 16, 2008
	DSCPs for Capacity-Admitted Traffic		DSCPs for Capacity-Admitted Traffic
	draft-ietf-tsvwg-admitted-realtime-dscp-02		draft-ietf-tsvwg-admitted-realtime-dscp-03
	Status of this Memo		Status of this Memo
	By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any		By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
	applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware		applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
	have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes		have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
	aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.		aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that		Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
	skipping to change at page 1, line 37		skipping to change at page 1, line 37
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at		The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
	http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.		http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
	The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at		The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
	http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.		http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
	This Internet-Draft will expire on May 19, 2008.		This Internet-Draft will expire on June 16, 2008.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).		Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document requests one DSCP from the IANA for real-time traffic		This document requests one DSCP from the IANA for real-time traffic
	classes similar to voice conforming to the Expedited Forwarding Per		classes similar to voice conforming to the Expedited Forwarding Per
	Hop Behavior, and admitted using a CAC procedure involving		Hop Behavior, and admitted using a CAC procedure involving
	skipping to change at page 4, line 52		skipping to change at page 4, line 52
	The requested DSCP applies to the Telephony Service Class described		The requested DSCP applies to the Telephony Service Class described
	in [RFC4594]. The video classes addressed include the		in [RFC4594]. The video classes addressed include the
	o interactive real-time traffic (CS4, used for Video conferencing		o interactive real-time traffic (CS4, used for Video conferencing
	and Interactive gaming),		and Interactive gaming),
	o broadcast TV (CS3) for use in a video on demand context, and		o broadcast TV (CS3) for use in a video on demand context, and
	o AF4 Multimedia conferencing (video conferencing).		o AF4 Multimedia conferencing (video conferencing).
			Since the admitted video classes have not had the history of mixing
			admitted and non-admitted traffic in the same PHB as has occurred for
			EF, an additional DSCP code point is not recommended. Instead, the
			recommended "best practice" is to perform admission control for the
			above video classes.
	Other video classes are not believed to be required by the targeted		Other video classes are not believed to be required by the targeted
	services and to not have the current problem of confusion with		services and to not have the current problem of confusion with
	unadmitted traffic. Within an ISP and on inter-ISP links (i.e.		unadmitted traffic. Within an ISP and on inter-ISP links (i.e.
	within networks whose internal paths are uniform at hundreds of		within networks whose internal paths are uniform at hundreds of
	megabits or faster), one would expect all of this traffic to be		megabits or faster), one would expect all of this traffic to be
	carried in the Real Time Traffic Class described in		carried in the Real Time Traffic Class described in
	[I-D.ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-class-aggr].		[I-D.ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-class-aggr].
	1.1. Definitions		1.1. Definitions
	skipping to change at page 6, line 15		skipping to change at page 6, line 19
	NNI: A Network/Network Interface (NNI) is the interface (often a		NNI: A Network/Network Interface (NNI) is the interface (often a
	physical link or its virtual equivalent) that connects two		physical link or its virtual equivalent) that connects two
	entities that trust each other within limits, and in which the two		entities that trust each other within limits, and in which the two
	are seen as trading services for value. Figure 1 shows three		are seen as trading services for value. Figure 1 shows three
	service networks that together provide the connectivity services		service networks that together provide the connectivity services
	that we call "the Internet". They are different administrations		that we call "the Internet". They are different administrations
	and are very probably in competition, but exchange contracts for		and are very probably in competition, but exchange contracts for
	connectivity and capacity that enable them to offer specific		connectivity and capacity that enable them to offer specific
	services to their customers.		services to their customers.
	NNIs are not as commonly bottlenecks in the Internet, because		NNIs may not be bottlenecks in the Internet if service providers
	service providers contractually agree to provision serious amounts		contractually agree to provision excess capacity at them.
	of excess capacity at them. However, they are policy-controlled		However, NNI performance may differ by ISP, and the performance
	interfaces (especially in BGP), and therefore may require policy		guarantee interval may also range from a month to a much shorter
	to be applied in traffic prioritization.		period of time. Furthermore, a peering point NNI may not have
			contractual performance guarantees or may become overloaded during
			certain conditions. They are also policy-controlled interfaces,
			especially in BGP. As a result, they may require policy to be
			applied in traffic prioritization.
	Queue: There are multiple ways to build a multi-queue scheduler.		Queue: There are multiple ways to build a multi-queue scheduler.
	Weighted Round Robin (WRR) literally builds multiple lists and		Weighted Round Robin (WRR) literally builds multiple lists and
	visits them in a specified order, while a calendar queue (often		visits them in a specified order, while a calendar queue (often
	used to implement Weighted Fair Queuing, or WFQ) builds a list for		used to implement Weighted Fair Queuing, or WFQ) builds a list for
	each time interval and enqueues at most a stated amount of data in		each time interval and enqueues at most a stated amount of data in
	each such list for transmission during that time interval. While		each such list for transmission during that time interval. While
	these differ dramatically in implementation, the external		these differ dramatically in implementation, the external
	difference in behavior is generally negligible when they are		difference in behavior is generally negligible when they are
	properly configured. Consistent with the definitions used in the		properly configured. Consistent with the definitions used in the
	skipping to change at page 16, line 39		skipping to change at page 16, line 39
	Briscoe, B., "Pre-Congestion Notification marking",		Briscoe, B., "Pre-Congestion Notification marking",
	draft-briscoe-tsvwg-cl-phb-03 (work in progress),		draft-briscoe-tsvwg-cl-phb-03 (work in progress),
	October 2006.		October 2006.
	[I-D.chan-pcn-problem-statement]		[I-D.chan-pcn-problem-statement]
	Chan, K., "Pre-Congestion Notification Problem Statement",		Chan, K., "Pre-Congestion Notification Problem Statement",
	draft-chan-pcn-problem-statement-01 (work in progress),		draft-chan-pcn-problem-statement-01 (work in progress),
	October 2006.		October 2006.
	[I-D.charny-pcn-single-marking]		[I-D.charny-pcn-single-marking]
	Charny, A., "Pre-Congestion Notification Using Single		Charny, A., Zhang, X., Faucheur, F., and V. Liatsos, "Pre-
	Marking for Admission and Termination",		Congestion Notification Using Single Marking for Admission
	draft-charny-pcn-single-marking-02 (work in progress),		and Termination", draft-charny-pcn-single-marking-03
	July 2007.		(work in progress), November 2007.
	[I-D.ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-class-aggr]		[I-D.ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-class-aggr]
	Chan, K., Babiarz, J., and F. Baker, "Aggregation of		Chan, K., Babiarz, J., and F. Baker, "Aggregation of
	DiffServ Service Classes",		DiffServ Service Classes",
	draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-class-aggr-07 (work in		draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-class-aggr-07 (work in
	progress), November 2007.		progress), November 2007.
	[I-D.morita-tsvwg-pps]		[I-D.morita-tsvwg-pps]
	Morita, N. and G. Karlsson, "Framework of Priority		Morita, N. and G. Karlsson, "Framework of Priority
	Promotion Scheme", draft-morita-tsvwg-pps-01 (work in		Promotion Scheme", draft-morita-tsvwg-pps-01 (work in
End of changes. 6 change blocks.
	13 lines changed or deleted		23 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.34. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/