Subject: Re: draft-ietf-intserv-controlled-delay-svc-00.txt

From: [email-masked] (Fred Baker)
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 07:29:09 -0800

>Ordering
>
>   The TSpec's are ordered as follows; both the token bucket depth and
>   rate must be greater than or equal in order for the TSpec to be
>   greater than or equal.  The RSpec's are ordered by their numerical
>   values (in inverse order).  If both the target-delay and service-
>   level are specified, then both must be greater than or equal for the
>   RSpec to be greater than or equal.  Ordering is relevant to the
>   merging of reservation requests.

and we're trying to get the smallest of the specified delays, right?

I think each of these drafts could bear some effort here: the RSVP Spec
says that the service specifications will say how to merge flow
specifications. This tells me how to order them, but having ordered them it
should also say which to select.

I'm especially concerned about the "predictive" draft's delay XOR levels of
service; it seems to me that the host can define levels of service or
delay, and the router is required to order. I'd really be appreciative if
we could PICK ONE so that the router will in fact be able to order them; I
don't know how to compare service levels to delays, and I see no reason to
believe that some implementations will use one and some implementations the
other.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
computers run on smoke, it if leaks out they won't run