Re: [PCN] PCN edge behaviour experiment

[<[e-mail]>]

Hi Tom, hi Michael

"network running near capacity" is correct if complete links transmit
PCN traffic only. Otherwise, "PCN network capacities running near
congestion (on at least one interface)" is better. That may also
simplify experiments, dedicated tunnels in a live network with
proper marking may suffice.

Regards,

Ruediger


Tom:
> This document describes an experimental edge node behaviour to
> implement PCN in a network. The experiment may be run in a network in
> which a substantial proportion of the traffic carried is in the form
> of inelastic flows and where admission control of micro-flows is
> applied at the edge. For the effects of PCN to be observable, at least
> some links of the network should be running near or at capacity.

Michael:
Better: "the aggregate rate of admitted flows on some links should come
close to the bandwidths of these links."

> The amount of effort required to prepare the network for the
> experiment (see Section 5.1) may constrain the size of network to
> which it is applied. The purposes of the experiment are:
>
> - to validate the specification of the CL [SM] edge behaviour;
>
> - to evaluate the effectiveness of the CL [SM] edge behaviour in
>   preserving quality of service for admitted flows; and
>
> - to evaluate PCN's potential for reducing the amount of capital and
>   operational costs in comparison to alternative methods of assuring
>   quality of service.
>
> For the first two objectives, the experiment should run long enough
> for the network to experience sharp peaks of traffic in at least some
> directions.

Michael
These peaks could be intentionally caused for the sake of the experiment
so that the effect of admission control is visible.