Guarantee minimum jitter is to define an upper bound.
In defining the upper bound for 802.17 there are two parts;
1) on
the ring
2)
access to the ring
To
meet the customer requirements trade off will have to be
made:
1) BW
utilization
2)
delay/jitter
3)
loss
Jitter
in HP can be solved in different ways. Different method has different
implications. What are you proposing?
See
you tomorrow, on the wire....
Hans,
The
current draft of the RPR standard tries to achieve several objectives: high
link utilization, guaranteed minimum jitter for reserved HP traffic, no
packet loss on the ring, etc, and these objectives are conflicting
to each other sometimes. One customer may want to disallow any LP
packet drop on the ring even this means high jitter for the HP traffic;
another may want to guarantee minimum jitter to HP traffic (carrying TDM)
at risk of occasionally dropping some LP
packets.
My suggestion is that RPR provide a choice for the
customer to make his/her decision in conflict resolution.
I
didn't assume the operator wants to adjust the total load/throughput. Maybe this can be done more
easily if the above choice is provided.
Regards,
Yiming
> Yiming Yao: allow customer to choose between loss, jitter, and
utilization
Is the underlying
assumption that the operator of the ring (=customer?) wants to
adjust the total load/throughput?
Would this be for loadbalancing purposes?
regards,
Hans
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hans-Jürgen
Reumerman
Hans-J.Reumerman@xxxxxxxxxxx
Digital Communications &
networking
pww.pfa.research.philips.com/dc/
Philips Research Laboratories
Phone: +49 241 6003 629
Weisshausstr.2, 52066
Aachen, Germany Fax: +49 241 6003
519
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~