IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Last Call for draft-ietf-rolc-apr-00.txt

Juha Heinanen <jh@lohi.dat.tele.fi> Thu, 26 October 1995 08:51 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07607; 26 Oct 95 4:51 EDT
Received: from guelah.nexen.com by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07602; 26 Oct 95 4:51 EDT
Received: from maelstrom.nexen.com ([204.249.99.5]) by guelah.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA22150; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 04:26:13 -0400
Received: (from root@localhost) by maelstrom.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id EAA05911 for rolc-out; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 04:37:26 -0400
Received: from guelah.nexen.com (guelah.nexen.com [204.249.96.19]) by maelstrom.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA05899 for <rolc@nexen.com>; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 04:37:23 -0400
Received: from lohi.dat.tele.fi (lohi.dat.tele.fi [193.167.64.161]) by guelah.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA22146 for <rolc@nexen.com>; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 04:25:59 -0400
Received: (from jh@localhost) by lohi.dat.tele.fi (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA02429; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 10:29:17 +0200
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 10:29:17 +0200
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Juha Heinanen <jh@lohi.dat.tele.fi>
Message-Id: <199510260829.KAA02429@lohi.dat.tele.fi>
To: salo@msc.edu
CC: rolc@nexen.com
In-reply-to: <199510260258.VAA04715@uh.msc.edu> (salo@msc.edu)
Subject: Re: Last Call for draft-ietf-rolc-apr-00.txt
X-Orig-Sender: owner-rolc@nexen.com
Precedence: bulk
X-Info: Submissions to rolc@nexen.com
X-Info: [Un]Subscribe requests to rolc-request@nexen.com
X-Info: Archives for rolc via ftp://ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/ietf-mail-archive/rolc/ It is not clear to me how "SVCs exist," "SVCs don't exist," "SVCs are free," and "SVCs cost money" map into "address aggregates." On the other hand, it is fairly clear to me that users, (if we asked them and if they had a clue what we were talking about), would want to control the portions of their topology over which SVCs were used.

so there is a clear requirement to int-serv/rsvp that the user must be
able to, in addition to qos, also specify at which cost he/she is
willing to ask for such a qos.  is this already included?  in fact, the
user should have capability to specify alternative sets of requirements
and the network would pick the one it can support.

-- juha

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email