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

Hi, Dan.

I have been reading the article "Cisco adds IP multiplexing to mobile
satellite package", and I think there is an idea we should stress in the
BOF:

We are not only saving bandwidth but also reducing the amount of pps. In the
satellite scenario a pps reduction can be translated directly to a x20
factor in the number of simultaneous calls to be transmitted.

Thanks,

Jose

De: Dan Wing [mailto:dwing@cisco.com] 
Enviado el: miércoles, 26 de junio de 2013 22:14
Para: jsaldana@unizar.es
CC: tcmtf@ietf.org
Asunto: Re: [tcmtf] Answers to possible questions in the BOF

On Jun 26, 2013, at 3:49 AM, Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es> wrote:

Question 4: Is TCM-TF interesting for the Industry? Should the IETF
standardize this?

Answer:

1) TCM-TF intends to update RFC4170, which optimizes RTP VoIP traffic. So if
RFC4170 was interesting, why not updating it?

2) TCM-TF can be useful in order to save bandwidth in many cases:

- Aggregation network of *network operators*: We are saving bandwidth by
optimizing and putting together traffic flows. Is this interesting for a
network operator? What about overprovisioning? The idea is that there are
places and moments in which a number of flows based on small packets are in
the same place and at the same moment. Then, TCM-TF can be applied in order
to provide flexibility. We are not optimizing the overall Internet traffic,
we are optimizing specific flows with very tight delay requirements, which
network operators have to take care of in a special way.

 <http://www.huawei.com/ilink/en/download/HW_193034>
www.huawei.com/ilink/en/download/HW_193034

- *End to end* optimization: Nowadays, many appliances are used to connect
remote offices of the same company (creating a VPN). So if a tunnel exists,
why not optimizing this traffic when possible? We would save bandwidth in
the access network, where it can be scarce.

- Wireless and satellite scenarios.

"Cisco adds IP multiplexing to mobile satellite package", April 2012,
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2012/040912-cisco-ip-multiplexing-258082.ht
ml

Any other thoughts? Any other scenarios in mind? Potential beneficiaries?

Some networks, today, use cRTP (RFC2508) on their access links.  This gives
bandwidth savings on the access link, but consumes considerable CPU
horsepower on the aggregation router (to perform cRTP), but provides no
bandwidth savings across the network core.  If, instead, the bandwidth could
be saved on the access link, across the core, and on the far-end access link
-- all without the CPU impact on the aggregation router -- it is a
considerable win.

-d

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
 <mailto:tcmtf@ietf.org> tcmtf@ietf.org
 <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcmtf>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcmtf