VCC cost models .... (was Re: Limits on SVCCs)

[Andrew Smith <[e-mail]>]

> From [e-mail] Mon Apr 29 13:27:06 1996
> To: Derya Cansever <[e-mail]>
> Cc: [e-mail], [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: Limits on SVCCs 
> In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon, 29 Apr 1996 15:44:43 -0400.
>              <[e-mail]> 
> Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 16:17:47 -0400
> From: Grenville Armitage <[e-mail]>

> Thirdly, the cost of the new VC wrt the original one that the client
> presumably had open to their default router. Customers need to
> be able to characterize the total benefit to themselves before
> they'll be happy having NHRP tell them to place a long-distance
> ATM call instead of a local call. 

This, in a nutshell, is one of the big NHRP issues: the client is in a 
position to know how much it wants to pay for the connection but the network 
is the only place that knows how much it will cost. With NHRP as the
signaling protocol, there is no way to set up a mutually beneficial deal.
Even worse than this is a situation with an intervening "low-cost" proxy-client 
which probably does not communicate any form of cost information with the real 
client (who is the one with the open wallet).

> cheers,
> gja
> 

Andrew

********************************************************************************
Andrew Smith					TEL:	[phone]
Bay Networks, Inc. 				FAX:	[phone]
Santa Clara, CA					E-m:	[e-mail]
********************************************************************************