Re: [bmwg] Resource Reservation Methodology
Andras Korn <korn@tmit.bme.hu> Sun, 25 March 2007 18:52 UTC
Return-path: <bmwg-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HVXpX-0000Ha-V5; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 14:52:39 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HVXpX-0000HV-2Q for bmwg@ietf.org; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 14:52:39 -0400
Received: from chardonnay.math.bme.hu ([152.66.83.144]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HVXpS-0005jb-Jl for bmwg@ietf.org; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 14:52:39 -0400
Received: (qmail 25136 invoked from network); 25 Mar 2007 18:52:13 -0000
Received: from hellgate.intra.guy (HELO hellgate.av.hu) (192.168.0.4) by chardonnay.intra.guy with SMTP; 25 Mar 2007 18:52:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 15644 invoked by uid 1000); 25 Mar 2007 20:52:13 +0200
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 20:52:13 +0200
From: Andras Korn <korn@tmit.bme.hu>
To: bmwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bmwg] Resource Reservation Methodology
Message-ID: <20070325185212.GM21545@utopia.intra.guy>
References: <200703251819.l2PIJ6Xs022175@attrh3i.attrh.att.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <200703251819.l2PIJ6Xs022175@attrh3i.attrh.att.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17
X-BeenThere: bmwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Benchmarking Methodology Working Group <bmwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:bmwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bmwg-bounces@ietf.org
On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 02:17:32PM -0400, Al Morton wrote:
Hi,
> As a follow-up to our session in Prague, where we discussed:
>
> >4. Benchmarking Resource Reservation Mechanisms (Krisztian Nemeth)
> > draft-ietf-bmwg-benchres-term-08 RFC Ed Queue
> > What was accomplished, what is ahead...
For the benefit of those who didn't follow that draft, I'm one of its
authors.
> Feel free to CC: me, so I know who is interested. Also, feel free to
> use the bmwg-list for any general comments or discussions on the scope
> of this effort.
What I'd be interested in hearing about is whether you think a single
methodology document should try to address all reservation protocols in
general, or does the variety warrant separate documents for each protocol,
or some protocols?
In particular, I see the conformance testing issue as rather protocol
dependent, but if we are to determine the scalability limits of a device, we
must be able to say at what load level it loses its ability to conform to
protocol specifications.
Any thoughts?
András
--
Andras Korn <korn at chardonnay.math.bme.hu>
<http://chardonnay.math.bme.hu/~korn/> QOTD:
The trouble with bigamy is having two mothers-in-law.
_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
bmwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg
- [bmwg] Resource Reservation Methodology Al Morton
- Re: [bmwg] Resource Reservation Methodology Andras Korn