Hi
I have some comments on this draft.
Carlos
---------------
1. As the main difference between AQUILA and TEQUILA approaches is the
concept of predefined services, and their use is optional, I think it
could be better to put section 4 in an appendix for implementaion issues.
2. Section 3.3.1, page 7 - "DS-Byte"
Better to refer to this field as DSField, since it is a six bit field
now, according to draft-ietf-diffserv-new-terms-03.txt
3. Section 3.3.2, page 7 - ... IP address can have "partial" wildcards...
Is it meant something like address/prefix-length ?
4. Section 3.3.2, page 7 - EXTENDED FlowID
In fact, it means an SLS may be applied to multiple flows as a whole.
5. Section 3.4, page 8,
Table 1 - Why is EAR not applicable to STB ?
m: minimum policed unit
maybe I am missing some concept, but what is the real meaning of it ?
More specific issues (envolving the first trial. btw, I would like to
know more details of it)
6. Why was it choosen to use qualitative parameters for implementing
quantitative services ?
7. Section 4.1, Page 11
Parameter m, default value 40B. Since IP + UDP + RTP headers = 40B,
does it mean a packet with no data ?
8. Section 4.3, Page 13
I do not have experience developing streaming applications, but I
cannot foresee the behaviour of such an application using a congestion
control mechanism.
9. Section 3.2, Page 6
The first trial will implement p2a scopes and applications with strict
performance requirements. I would like to know about the network
provisioning for this case.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Nov 10 2000 - 14:13:23 CET