[Diffserv-interest] DiffServ over ATM

John Tillberg <John.E.Tillberg@telia.se> Thu, 30 August 2001 15:03 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA19091 for <diffserv-interest-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:03:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA00363; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:03:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA00330 for <diffserv-interest@ns.ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:03:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from malmo.trab.se (malmo.trab.se [131.115.48.10]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA19080 for <diffserv-interest@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:02:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from trab-hermes.haninge.trab.se (trab-hermes.haninge.trab.se [131.115.158.15]) by malmo.trab.se (8.10.1/TRAB-primary-2) with ESMTP id f7UF25j15965 for <diffserv-interest@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:02:05 +0200 (MEST)
Received: by trab-hermes.haninge.trab.se with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <N2Z5MSGQ>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:03:51 +0200
Message-ID: <778DFE9B4E3BD111A74E08002BA3DC0D03F390BA@trab-hermes.haninge.trab.se>
From: John Tillberg <John.E.Tillberg@telia.se>
To: "'diffserv-interest@ietf.org'" <diffserv-interest@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:03:50 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Subject: [Diffserv-interest] DiffServ over ATM
Sender: diffserv-interest-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: diffserv-interest-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: Differentiated services general discussion <diffserv-interest.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: diffserv-interest@ietf.org

Hello DiffServers!
I'm currently doing some simulations (using Opnet) of IP over ATM where I
use WFQ to differentiate between two separate traffic classes on a network
with low bandwidth links (2 Mbps). It appears that the WFQ mechanism doesn't
have any significant impact on the performance of the network. No matter how
I tune the weights, or even if I overload some of the links, I get almost
zero delay for both of my queues. However I do get delay on the ATM layer
(and I am aware of that I have to map my IP QoS classes onto proper ATM QoS
classes). I presume this is because the forwarding speed on the IP layer is
much higher than the bandwidth of the network. Hence every (conforming)
incoming packet will receive service on the IP layer (i.e. sent down to the
lower layers) right away even if there is a state of congestion on the ATM
layer. Have I misunderstood the matter? If not: Is this the same case for
DiffServ? Does the effect of the IP-packet scheduler get  "disabled" in a
similar manner when you run DiffServ over ATM? 
Yours Sincerely

John Tillberg 

*********************************************************************
John Tillberg
Telia Research AB 	Phone:  +46 8-713 82 07
Wireless Solutions	Fax:       +46 8-713 81 49
Vitsandsgatan 9           	Mobile:  +46 702-43 43 90
SE-123 86 Farsta      	Email:  John.E.Tillberg@telia.se	
Sweden                 	

********************************************************************


_______________________________________________
Diffserv-interest mailing list
Diffserv-interest@ietf.org
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv-interest