RE: [Ieprep] Re: WG Review: Recharter of Internet EmergencyPreparedness (ieprep)

Janet P Gunn <jgunn6@csc.com> Thu, 16 November 2006 15:03 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gkilx-0001CS-HX; Thu, 16 Nov 2006 10:03:25 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gkilw-0001C5-35; Thu, 16 Nov 2006 10:03:24 -0500
Received: from amer-mta08.csc.com ([20.137.52.152]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gkilu-0007Zi-Im; Thu, 16 Nov 2006 10:03:24 -0500
Received: from amer-gw09.amer.csc.com (amer-gw09.amer.csc.com [20.6.39.245]) by amer-mta08.csc.com (Switch-3.1.6/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id kAGF3K5P028001; Thu, 16 Nov 2006 10:03:20 -0500 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <28F05913385EAC43AF019413F674A017101B71FB@OCCLUST04EVS1.ugd.att.com>
Subject: RE: [Ieprep] Re: WG Review: Recharter of Internet EmergencyPreparedness (ieprep)
To: "Dolly, Martin C, ALABS" <mdolly@att.com>
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes 652HF83 November 04, 2004
Message-ID: <OF970F9A52.148B5A7A-ON85257228.00529518-85257228.0052B30A@csc.com>
From: Janet P Gunn <jgunn6@csc.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 10:03:17 -0500
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on AMER-GW09/SRV/CSC(Release 6.5.3|September 14, 2004) at 11/16/2006 10:02:10 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 02ec665d00de228c50c93ed6b5e4fc1a
Cc: "Robert G. Cole" <robert.cole@jhuapl.edu>, Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>, ieprep@ietf.org, Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>, Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu>, Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ieprep@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet Emergency Preparedness Working Group <ieprep.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep>, <mailto:ieprep-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ieprep@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ieprep-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep>, <mailto:ieprep-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ieprep-bounces@ietf.org






Yes, we absolutely must  address them in the context of real-life
architecture deployment scenarios.

Janet


"Dolly, Martin C, ALABS" <mdolly@att.com> wrote on 11/16/2006 08:29:59 AM:

> Janet,
>
> I agree that the items you listed below are best analyzed/discussed in
> the IETF, for as long as real-life architecture deployment scenarios are
> taken into account.
>
> Martin
>
> Janet Gunn wrote on 11/16:
> Some of the possibilities in that continuum include (in no particular
> order):
> - Allowing extra sessions in, and permitting degradation in QoS across
> all
> sessions.
> - Allowing a higher packet drop rate across all the "lower priority"
> calls.
> - Negotiating a lower bandwidth allocation, possibly accompanied by a
> changing to a lower rate bandwidth codec when a higher priority session
> needs to "preempt".
> - Negotiating (or arbitrarily imposing) a different PHB (e.g. AF or BE
> rather than EF) for lower priority sessions when a higher priority
> session
> needs to "preempt".
> - Different Capacity Admission Control mechanisms for different priority
> sessions.
>
> The analysis/understanding of these (and other) alternatives is much
> better
> done in the IETF than in the historically-circuit-swiched SDOs.
>
> Janet
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ietf mailing list
> > Ietf@ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ieprep mailing list
> Ieprep@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ieprep mailing list
> Ieprep@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep


_______________________________________________
Ieprep mailing list
Ieprep@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep