[RPRWG] RAH: Rate Ad Hoc meeting

[Necdet Uzun <nuzun@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks David.

Our first Reserved rate Add Hoc (RAH) meeting will be on Tuesday 3/19 at 9:00AM at Cisco, San Jose. I need to know who are planning to attend.

Meeting info:

Time: Tuesday 3/19 at 9:00AM
Duration: 3 hours
Location:

Cisco way, Building 16
San Jose, CA 95134

There will be a projector and a white board in the room.

My phone #: 408-853-0461

Bridge info: not available yet. It will only be sent (on Monday) to those who confirms his(her) attendance.

David James wrote:

 Necdet,The quick start is most appreviated; I will be there. However, please consider:  1) Identify the CISCO location (Cisco, San Jose is a 15-mile radius).  2) Length of planned duration (I have assumed until 12:00 noon).  3) Provide a bridge or dial-in facility, for distant/European folks.  4) Identify if overhead projector will be available.  5) Resend the message with this information _and_ a correct subject line.DVJ David V. James, PhD
Chief Architect
Network Processing Solutions
Data Communications Division
Cypress Semiconductor
110 Nortech Parkway
San Jose, CA 95134
Work: +1.408.942.2010
Cell: +1.650.954.6906
Fax:  +1.408.942.2099
Work: djz@xxxxxxxxxxx
Base: dvj@xxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-17@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-stds-802-17@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Necdet Uzun
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 2:17 PM
To: John Lemon
Cc: stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [RPRWG] RAH: Minutes of Rate Ad Hoc meeting
 

Our first Reserved rate Add Hoc (RAH) meeting will be on Tuesday 3/19 at 9:00AM at Cisco, San Jose. I need to know who are planning to attend.
 

Thanks.

Necdet

John Lemon wrote:

The Rate Ad Hoc (hence known as RAH) met and agreed to discuss concerns and then plan how to continue. The following people expressed the following concerns.

Necdet Uzun: No packet loss on ring; not preclude STB; not complicate MAC design; high priority should be shaped to CBR; jitter can be worsened by control packets; ring not owned/operated by one entity, can trust all MACs, but not all clients

John Lemon:STB (or small second buffer of DTB) doesn't compromise DTB on same ring, such as effecting jitter sensitive traffic; reservation per link, different allowed; reserved traffic jitter bounded by N MTU; topology negotiated secondary buffer size determining ramp up of low pri traffic; loss < jitter < utilization; not constrained by 802 bridging, just support superset of 802 bridging – dumb client sends all BE traffic

Harry Peng: STB design is not precluded; must interop, but maybe at slightly reduced performance; separation of access jitter and transit jitter; constrained by 802 bridging compliance, make sure we don't break it

Luis Rovira: concerned about complexity; wants simulation/calculation proof/certainty

Stein Gjessing: how do we specify what values are advertised and how do we specify node's behavior to comply

Italo Busi: negotiate for priorities for loss, jitter, utilization

Yiming Yao: allow customer to choose between loss, jitter, and utilization

Anoop: should not preclude VDQ; should allow algorithm other than ramp up/down

Other attendees: Tricia Hill, Vitorio Mascolo, Yongdong Zhao, Rhett Brikovskis, Li Mo, Peter Jones.

Going forward:

1. General interest messages sent to reflector with titles starting with RAH
2. Ad hoc bridge + face to face (9:00 am PT, Tuesdays, starting 3/19), Necdet sets bridge
3. Define priority, reservation, reclamation, classes of service, etc and give usage
4. Propose how to meet all of above requirements
5. Document
6. Define scenarios to evaluate against
7. Simulate against simulation reference model

begin:vcard 
n:Uzun;Necdet
tel;work:408 853 0461
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:www.cisco.com
version:2.1
email;internet:nuzun@xxxxxxxxx
adr;quoted-printable:;;Cisco Systems, Inc.=0D=0A170 W. Tasman Drive SJ-16-3=0D=0A;San Jose;CA;95134;
fn:Necdet Uzun
end:vcard