Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification
"JinHyeock Choi" <jinchoe@gmail.com> Fri, 02 February 2007 02:51 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1HCoW3-0007W2-EZ; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 21:51:07 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HCoW1-0007TK-Mr
for 16ng@ietf.org; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 21:51:05 -0500
Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.190])
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HCoW0-0001PA-EJ
for 16ng@ietf.org; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 21:51:05 -0500
Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id l36so1101520nfa
for <16ng@ietf.org>; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 18:51:03 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta;
h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
b=rgKfFCtrVFfmTCGxkjm3KY83oMuH09/5hSyGHuS/GaxogOs0dFyL2cGKyNfCJiBmfPlVFCJgQVeJiMeO/H1C8G/Gt4wv3hapSyiWQFCTGKz7b4pSndRFoXU5XPpPd+R/qf5kPR22Mx6V54XVBn5fr17B+gmJAA1nC3bpVBJ2UC4=
Received: by 10.49.27.11 with SMTP id e11mr3972510nfj.1170384663548;
Thu, 01 Feb 2007 18:51:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.48.217.6 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 18:51:03 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <92e919fb0702011851v42ff4d03m76be205179a6cc43@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 11:51:03 +0900
From: "JinHyeock Choi" <jinchoe@gmail.com>
To: "Alexandru Petrescu" <alexandru.petrescu@motorola.com>
Subject: Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification
In-Reply-To: <45C0C057.5040402@motorola.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <45BDFD58.8060202@piuha.net> <45C099CD.8010506@piuha.net>
<45C0A227.1040303@motorola.com> <45C0A4D1.9010602@piuha.net>
<92e919fb0701310737m45cbb6f8ud1dab68aa75f380d@mail.gmail.com>
<45C0C057.5040402@motorola.com>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8abaac9e10c826e8252866cbe6766464
Cc: 16ng@ietf.org, Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
X-BeenThere: 16ng@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: 16ng working group discussion list <16ng.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng>,
<mailto:16ng-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/16ng>
List-Post: <mailto:16ng@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:16ng-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng>,
<mailto:16ng-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: 16ng-bounces@ietf.org
Dear Alex
> JinHyeock, thanks for clarification. I think it confirms my
> expectations of how 802.16spec intends IPv6CS classifiers to work: by
> looking at IPv6 headers.
>
> Assume an IPv6 packet put by the SS's IPv6 stack on the 802.16MAC has
> the Traffic Class equal to DSCP AF11 '001010' (rfc2597 - Class1 with Low
> Drop Precedence).
>
> _How_ does this convert into a service flow?
DSCP value doesn't decide a service flow by itself. Usually CID is
determined in combination with the other values such as source/
destination addresses.
> More specifically, what is the priority assigned to this service flow?
> ("traffic priority": sec 11.13.5 of 802.16-2004). This encoding has
> values from 0 to 7 with higher numbers indicating higher priority. If
> not the "traffic priority" value then what are the other service
> flow-specific constants that this IPv6 DSCP (diffserv codepoint)
> converts into.
As of my knowledge, there is no rule to convert IPv6 DSCP (diffserv
codepoint) into 802.16 QoS parameter in a deterministic way. I
understand its up to the implementation & policy.
Thanks for your kind consideration.
Best Regards
JinHyeock
_______________________________________________
16NG mailing list
16NG@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng
- [16NG] FW: Review of the ipv6-over-ipv6cs draft Jari Arkko
- Re: [16NG] FW: Review of the ipv6-over-ipv6cs dra… Jari Arkko
- Re: traffic classification (was: [16NG] FW: Revie… Alexandru Petrescu
- [16NG] Re: traffic classification Jari Arkko
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification JinHyeock Choi
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification yw_chen
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification Alexandru Petrescu
- [16NG] Re: Review of the ipv6-over-ipv6cs draft Basavaraj Patil
- [16NG] Re: Review of the ipv6-over-ipv6cs draft Pekka Savola
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification JinHyeock Choi
- [16NG] Re: Review of the ipv6-over-ipv6cs draft Basavaraj Patil
- [16NG] Re: Review of the ipv6-over-ipv6cs draft Pekka Savola
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [16NG] Re: Review of the ipv6-over-ipv6cs dra… JinHyeock Choi
- DNA and using 3*MaxRtrAdvInterval [Re: [16NG] Re:… Pekka Savola
- [16NG] Re: Review of the ipv6-over-ipv6cs draft Basavaraj Patil
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification JinHyeock Choi
- Re: DNA and using 3*MaxRtrAdvInterval [Re: [16NG]… JinHyeock Choi
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification Jari Arkko
- RE: [16NG] Re: traffic classification Riegel, Maximilian
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification Basavaraj Patil
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification Jari Arkko
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification Basavaraj Patil
- Re: [16NG] Re: traffic classification Basavaraj Patil