Re: PQC and QOSPF

[Yao-Min Chen <[e-mail]>]

Fujikawa-san,

FUJIKAWA Kenji wrote:
> 
> Yao-Min Chen;
> 
> From: Yao-Min Chen <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: PQC and QOSPF
> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 15:52:33 -0700
> 
> > Using RSVP to carry routing related info does appear
> > to violate the separation between reservation and
> > routing.
> 
> Why do you think the separation is preferable?
> QoS routing won't be achieved without reservation,
> since QoS parameters are not informed.
> QoS routing is tightly associated with reservation
> from the beginning.

Jon Crowcroft answered very well in his message.  
Please refer to his complete message but I'd 
like to quote the following portion which points
out an alternative to "QoS routing is 
tightly associated with reservation."

Jon Crowcroft wrote:
> 
> 3/ have a third party distriburted entity that uses traffic
> measurement and is neither signaling protocol
> nor route protocol dependent
> 
> the latter approach seems to me to be the best option sicne we can
> then evolve routing signaling and admission control (and charging) all
> seperately...

Although still not quite sure about the traffic measurement 
part (have yet to investigate what such a technique can do), 
I pretty much agree that we should "evolve routing, signaling, 
and admission control (and charging) all separately."

-- 
Yao-Min Chen, Fujitsu Labs of America, [e-mail]  
595 Lawrence Expressway, Sunnyvale, CA 94086-3922
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]