>Let us see :) You are contradicting your-self. Just in the above
>para you said "SOME reduction in end-to-end performance" and
>again said "diffrout is not going to solve ANY problem".
end to end performance reduction is authors view. My comments were
more particular towards *diffrout* than *ToS routing*. diffrout
is suggesting n-class whereas ToS routing just two classes. you are
mixing author's ToS scheme with your suggestions. diffrout is not
scalable when compared to ToS routing. So talk about your proposal
(diffrout) than ToS routing.
>If that SOME reduction is tolerable then, I think, we solved
>SOME problem. Thus I can prove that that statement
>"diffrout is not going to solve ANY problem" is incorrect.
which problem you have solved here? If you consider end to end
delay as major problem that diffrout is going to solve, first let
us work with NSIS group to define the signaling mechanism and define
some per-domain behaviour, develop some inter-domain business models
and then we will solve the problem of e2e delay across a diffserv
network.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 04 2003 - 04:10:04 EDT