Subject: delay budget

From: [email-masked] (Jan-Peter Richter)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 15:28:56 +0200 (MET DST)

Hi all,

(I'm new to this list, so I appologise if this is an old question etc.)

As far as I understand, in GS the receiver uses the IS hop count of the
received ADSPEC to determine the share of the desired delay budget which each
IS-router may spend. This is done by dividing the budget by the hop count.
(right?)

Is there a way to divide the budget unequally among the routers?

What happens if non-IS routers are part of the path (as indicated by the
break bit)? I suppose, no special action is taken and the guarantee is
simply 'downgraded' to be approximate, since non-IS routers may spoil
the guarantee anyway. (right?)

Any enlightenment is appreciated.

	Jan-Peter Richter

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan-Peter Richter				Vogt-Koelln-Str.30
Universitaet Hamburg				D-22527 Hamburg
Fachbereich Informatik		       		Tel: +49 40 5494-2350
Arbeitsgruppe Telekommunikation        		Fax: +49 40 5494-2328 
und Rechnernetze

e-mail:	[email-masked]
www: http://www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/TKRN/world/staff/jpr/jpr.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Craig Partridge <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 97 09:28:01 -0700

As far as I understand, in GS the receiver uses the IS hop count of the
    received ADSPEC to determine the share of the desired delay budget which
    each IS-router may spend. This is done by dividing the budget by the
    hop count.  (right?)

Nope.  There's no notion of a per hop budget except (maybe) in the slack term.

If you ignore the slack term (makes things tricky) all that happens is
that the receiver takes the M, Dtot and Ctot and its target delay and
solves for R, which it then puts in the RSpec.

The slack term is an enhancement which allows different hops to shift some
of the cost of providing performance around.

Right.

Craig