Re: [tcmtf] Answers to possible questions in the BOF

Another answer for this question is that if you reduce the pps in the 
network it is possible that the delay also reduces, because the nodes 
have minor charge of work.
Julián

El 25/06/2013 10:26, Jose Saldana escribió:
>
> Question 3: You are talking about real-time services (VoIP, online 
> games, remote desktop). **Why adding a new (multiplexing) delay?** 
> Would it harm the user's experience with the service?
>
> Answer
>
> 1) We have had that question in mind from the very beginning. We want 
> to save bandwidth and pps, but always preserving subjective quality. 
> In fact, a specific draft has been written including a set of 
> recommendations of the maximum delays that can be tolerated by users 
> of different services. The draft includes references to studies where 
> subjective quality has been evaluated with real people.
>
> 2) In addition, our idea is that TCM-TF can be something to be used 
> dynamically when required. Some examples:
>
> - I am in the rush hour and I notice a lot of traffic in my network. 
> In order to avoid the collapse, I optimize traffic. I add a small 
> delay, but the bandwidth savings can make it possible that the service 
> still works.
>
> - I am an online games provider and I am releasing a new title. The 
> first days, a lot of people will want to play. So, how can I dimension 
> my network? Should I dimension it for the worst case?
>
> TCM-TF provides flexibility: there is a tradeoff: a small additional 
> delay as the price for maintaining the service. It should be taken 
> into account that for certain services the bandwidth savings are 50 or 
> even 60%.
>
> 3) If I have a high number of flows, I can achieve significant 
> bandwidth savings while adding small delays. Some examples:
>
> - 10 VoIP flows G729 can be optimized including one packet from each 
> flow (average additional delay 10ms) and 50% of bandwidth can be saved
>
> - if I have 100 flows of a TCP-based online game, I can achieve 45% 
> bandwidth saving with a multiplexing period of 30 ms (average 
> additional delay 15ms)
>
> 4) TCM-TF is not only for real-time services. Other small-packet 
> services can be optimized, and in this case the additional delay would 
> not be significant.
>
> Any other thoughts?
>
> Jose
>
> *De:*tcmtf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:tcmtf-bounces@ietf.org] *En nombre 
> de *Jose Saldana
> *Enviado el:* lunes, 24 de junio de 2013 13:00
> *Para:* tcmtf@ietf.org
> *Asunto:* [tcmtf] Answers to possible questions in the BOF
>
> I would like to start a thread about possible questions people may ask 
> in the BOF. Obviously, we also need answers, so we should cooperate.
>
> This is different from the "questions to ask in the BOF". This will be 
> discussed separately.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Jose
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tcmtf mailing list
> tcmtf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcmtf