Re: [RE] Is anything special required??
Arthur,
While "over-provisioned" may or may not be abstract, it is
clearly subjective. It is entirely possible for reasonable
people to disagree about how over-provisioned a given
network is. Contrast this with a network where bandwidth is
reserved -- the amount of available bandwidth is a
deterministic quantity that is readily available to all.
Worse yet, while everyone is dipping into the presumably
infinite pool of bandwidth, the over-provisioned state can
disappear without warning if some unanticipated traffic
shows up. This results in service degradation to traffic
already on the network. As Geoff has pointed out, this is
undesirable.
Les
---- Original message ----
>Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 09:17:07 +0100
>From: Arthur Marris <arthurm@CADENCE.COM>
>Subject: Re: [RE] Is anything special required??
>To: STDS-802-3-RE@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>
>
>David,
>
>> For some of us, the goals are to allow time-sensitive
>> traffic to occupy 75% of the bandwidth on 100Mb/s links,
>> with no other loading or topology constraints. This is
>> a bit easier to deal with, since the abstract quantities
>> of "over provisioned" and "would notice" are better
>> quantified and therefore measurable/provable.
>
>I do not agree that the term "over provisioned" is an
abstract quantity.
>If a 100Mbps network can carry the traffic with bandwidth
allocation
>then a gigabit network will be over-provisioned.
>
>> While the preceding goals, there do seem to be a few
>> special subscription and pacing requirements.
>
>> Do you disagree on those goals, or on the conclusions
>> we have reached, based on those goals?
>
>I think the goal at this time should be to identify the
needs and
>requirements of various CE applications in terms of
throughput, latency,
>jitter, loss etc and see what enhancements need to be made
to Ethernet
>(if any) to address these. I think Denis said something
similar in a
>previous message.
>
>Arthur.