Re: Reg: Quality of Service routing

Bala Rajagopalan <braja@ccrl.nj.nec.com> Mon, 21 December 1998 23:40 UTC

Received: from ns.newbridge.com (ns.newbridge.com [192.75.23.67]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA14012 for <qosr-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Dec 1998 18:40:16 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from smtpd@localhost) by ns.newbridge.com (8.8.8/8.6.12) id PAA26133 for qosr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 21 Dec 1998 15:28:10 -0500 (EST)
Received: from portal1.newbridge.com(192.75.23.76), claiming to be "kanata-mh1.ca.newbridge.com" via SMTP by ns.newbridge.com, id smtpdLRBa14031; Mon Dec 21 15:20:53 1998
Received: from qmaster.ca.newbridge.com by kanata-mh1.ca.newbridge.com with ESMTP; Mon, 21 Dec 1998 15:06:24 -0500
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by qmaster.ca.newbridge.com. (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA23426 for qosr-outgoing; Mon, 21 Dec 1998 14:51:09 -0500 (EST)
Received: from distmaster.ca.newbridge.com (distmaster.ca.newbridge.com [138.120.118.27]) by qmaster.ca.newbridge.com. (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id SAA07121 for <qosr@qmaster>; Sun, 20 Dec 1998 18:49:50 -0500 (EST)
Received: from kanata-mh1.ca.newbridge.com by distmaster.ca.newbridge.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id SAA05658; Sun, 20 Dec 1998 18:49:48 -0500
Received: from [138.120.118.49] by kanata-mh1.ca.newbridge.com with ESMTP; Sun, 20 Dec 1998 18:49:26 -0500
Received: (from smtpd@localhost) by ns.newbridge.com (8.8.8/8.6.12) id SAA18725 for qosr@newbridge.com; Sun, 20 Dec 1998 18:49:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: from hermes.ccrl.nj.nec.com(138.15.101.93) via SMTP by ns.newbridge.com, id smtpdAAAa18721; Sun Dec 20 18:49:16 1998
Received: from ccrl.nj.nec.com (braja@braja-ppp.ccrl.nj.nec.com [138.15.98.41]) by hermes.ccrl.nj.nec.com (1.00/LJF980616) with ESMTP id SAA11427; Sun, 20 Dec 1998 18:40:55 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <367D8CEC.757A39C7@ccrl.nj.nec.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 23:49:00 +0000
From: Bala Rajagopalan <braja@ccrl.nj.nec.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.0.35 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: Roch Guerin <guerin@ee.upenn.edu>
CC: "Raghu V.V.J Vadapalli" <iprsvp@yahoo.com>, routing quality <qosr@newbridge.com>, MultiProtocol Label Switching <mpls@external.cisco.com>, braja@ccrl.nj.nec.com
Subject: Re: Reg: Quality of Service routing
References: <19981220150534.13933.rocketmail@send103.yahoomail.com> <367D2FCC.862C361@ee.upenn.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-qosr@newbridge.com
Precedence: bulk
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Roch Guerin wrote:
> 
> Raghu V.V.J Vadapalli wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Besides the delay issue that Tony mentions, you should also consider
> that tx bandwidth is not the only resource inolved in delivering your
> data.  You also need switches/routers that can keep up with the
> bandwidth, and if they don't they are the resource you need to focus on,
> i.e., you need to consider the forwarding tput available rather than
> just the raw bandwidth.
> 
> Roch

I'd assume that if abundant bw is available then the routers will
also be big and obese. 

but I don't believe (or at least like to believe) in the premise that a
network can be economically maintained at low utilizations all the time 
thus obviating need for proper engineering and intelligent routing. 

regards,

Bala