Re: [NSIS] AD comments on draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-21
Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> Thu, 29 October 2009 16:49 UTC
Return-Path: <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: nsis@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nsis@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6951B3A67E7 for <nsis@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:49:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.121
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.121 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.099, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_OBFU_Q1=0.227]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wwWlMYA-szG4 for <nsis@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:49:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw5.ericsson.se (mailgw5.ericsson.se [193.180.251.36]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A7D83A67A3 for <nsis@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:49:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb24-b7b12ae000007bda-74-4ae9c7a38335
Received: from esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by mailgw5.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 30.BB.31706.3A7C9EA4; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:49:40 +0100 (CET)
Received: from esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.177]) by esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:49:39 +0100
Received: from [147.214.183.163] ([147.214.183.163]) by esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:49:39 +0100
Message-ID: <4AE9C7A3.7050805@ericsson.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:49:39 +0100
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Gerald Ash <gash5107@yahoo.com>
References: <823546.56279.qm@web63606.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <823546.56279.qm@web63606.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Oct 2009 16:49:39.0541 (UTC) FILETIME=[CE366050:01CA58B7]
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Cc: NSIS <nsis@ietf.org>, Georgios Karagiannis <karagian@cs.utwente.nl>, "draft-ietf-nsis-qspec@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-nsis-qspec@tools.ietf.org>, David Black <black_david@emc.com>
Subject: Re: [NSIS] AD comments on draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-21
X-BeenThere: nsis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Next Steps in Signaling <nsis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis>, <mailto:nsis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nsis>
List-Post: <mailto:nsis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nsis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis>, <mailto:nsis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:49:26 -0000
Hi, Yes, I was more interested in the answer than necessary addition to the documents. However, the text proposal is good. Sorry for not being able to respond before the cut-off. /Magnus Gerald Ash skrev: > Hi Georgios, > > I agree with your suggestion, thank you for that. > > Magnus, does Georgios' suggestion take care of your comment #11? > > Thanks, > Regards, > Jerry > > --- On *Sat, 10/24/09, Georgios Karagiannis /<karagian@cs.utwente.nl>/* > wrote: > > > From: Georgios Karagiannis <karagian@cs.utwente.nl> > Subject: Re: [NSIS] AD comments on draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-21 > To: "Magnus Westerlund" <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>, "Gerald > Ash" <gash5107@yahoo.com> > Cc: "David Black" <black_david@emc.com>, > "draft-ietf-nsis-qspec@tools.ietf.org" > <draft-ietf-nsis-qspec@tools.ietf.org>, "NSIS" <nsis@ietf.org> > Date: Saturday, October 24, 2009, 3:33 AM > > Hi Magnus > > Regarding comment 11: > >>> 11. This may seem out of context but I do want to know the > answer to how > >>> the situation is handled when QNI and QNR are neighbors on a non QoS > >>> enabled network. > >> > >> What "situation" are you referring to here? IMO you can't have a QNI > >> and QNR in a "non QoS enabled network". By definition, a QNI and QNR > >> are only defined in an NSIS enabled network (i.e., a QoS enabled > network). > > > >I am asking what is happening in these cases where a QNI has the QNR as > >peer and there are no network support. Clearly you will not get any > QoS, > >but is it clear to both QNI and QNR that this is the situation? > > > > I think that the solution for this situation is provided by QoS-NSLP. In > particular, this situation is detected by uing the generic flag BREAK > (B), see Section 5.1.1 Common header, in the QoS-NSLP draft, see below: > > BREAK (B) - when set, indicates that there are routers along the path > where QoS cannot be provided. > > Maybe it will be good to add a sentence in the QSPEC draft that > emphasizes." > > "As specified in QoS-NSLP, when there are routers along the path between > QNI and QNR where QoS cannot be provided then the QoS-NSLP generic flag > BREAK (B) is set." > > Best regards, > Georgios > > -- Magnus Westerlund IETF Transport Area Director ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ericsson AB | Phone +46 10 7148287 Färögatan 6 | Mobile +46 73 0949079 SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------
- [NSIS] AD comments on draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-21 Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [NSIS] AD comments on draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-21 Jukka Manner
- Re: [NSIS] AD comments on draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-21 Gerald Ash
- Re: [NSIS] AD comments on draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-21 Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [NSIS] AD comments on draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-21 Georgios Karagiannis
- Re: [NSIS] AD comments on draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-21 Gerald Ash
- Re: [NSIS] AD comments on draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-21 Magnus Westerlund