From owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Mon Jan 3 11:41:55 2000 Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA03929 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2000 11:41:55 -0500 (EST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id KAA04574 for issll-outgoing; Mon, 3 Jan 2000 10:25:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtp2.cluster.oleane.net (smtp2.cluster.oleane.net [195.25.12.17]) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA02092 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2000 10:25:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from oleane (dyn-1-1-234.Vin.dialup.oleane.fr [195.25.4.234]) by smtp2.cluster.oleane.net with SMTP id QAA74328; Mon, 3 Jan 2000 16:25:29 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <003001bf55fe$7b90bb00$0401a8c0@oleane.com> From: "Peter Lewis" To: Subject: VoDSL 2000 Conference Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2000 16:23:02 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002D_01BF5606.CEA9F2E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01BF5606.CEA9F2E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, =20 The VoDSL 2000 Conference will stand in Paris next 28-31 March. Key = speakers, case studies: take a look at: = http://www.upperside.fr/bavodsl.htm =20 Regards ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01BF5606.CEA9F2E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello,

The VoDSL 2000 Conference will stand = in Paris=20 next 28-31 March. Key speakers, case studies: take a look at: http://www.upperside.fr/bavo= dsl.htm

Regards

------=_NextPart_000_002D_01BF5606.CEA9F2E0-- From owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Wed Jan 5 16:58:12 2000 Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA16629 for ; Wed, 5 Jan 2000 16:58:11 -0500 (EST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA16916 for issll-outgoing; Wed, 5 Jan 2000 15:41:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from pilgrim.cisco.com (pilgrim.cisco.com [171.69.204.12]) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA14043 for ; Wed, 5 Jan 2000 15:41:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from scharny1-nt (ch2-dhcp134-184.cisco.com [161.44.134.184]) by pilgrim.cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/8.8.8) with SMTP id PAA05301 for ; Wed, 5 Jan 2000 15:40:45 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200001052040.PAA05301@pilgrim.cisco.com> X-Sender: acharny@pilgrim.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.2 Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2000 15:36:33 -0500 To: issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu From: Anna Charny Subject: delay bounds over Diffserv cloud Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Hi, The slides from the meeting in D.C. regarding delay bounds over a Diffserv cloud, and a paper containing the proof of the bounds and anlysis of the accuracy of the bound can be obtained from ftp://ftpeng.cisco.com/ftp/acharny/issll_vwg.ps ftp://ftpeng.cisco.com/ftp/acharny/aggregate_delay.ps via anonymous ftp. Apologies for the delay in posting it, Anna From owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Wed Jan 5 18:08:11 2000 Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA17680 for ; Wed, 5 Jan 2000 18:08:10 -0500 (EST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA16466 for issll-outgoing; Wed, 5 Jan 2000 17:15:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from procyon.pmc-sierra.bc.ca (procyon.pmc-sierra.bc.ca [134.87.115.1]) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA16913 for ; Wed, 5 Jan 2000 17:15:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from nt-exchange1.pmc-sierra.bc.ca (nt-exchange1.pmc-sierra.bc.ca [134.87.116.183]) by procyon.pmc-sierra.bc.ca (6.6.6/6.6.6) with ESMTP id OAA20799; Wed, 5 Jan 2000 14:10:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by nt-exchange1.pmc-sierra.bc.ca with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Wed, 5 Jan 2000 14:10:54 -0800 Message-ID: <336ECDAFDF7DD311B9E30090277AEE41351502@nt-exchange-bby.pmc-sierra.bc.ca> From: Shahram Davari To: "'Anna Charny'" , issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Subject: RE: delay bounds over Diffserv cloud Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 14:08:52 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Hi Anna, Thanks for the links. But I can't open them with Ghostview; neither under windows nor under UNIX. -Shahram > -----Original Message----- > From: Anna Charny [mailto:acharny@cisco.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2000 3:37 PM > To: issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu > Subject: delay bounds over Diffserv cloud > > > Hi, > > The slides from the meeting in D.C. regarding delay bounds > over a Diffserv cloud, and a paper containing the proof of > the bounds and anlysis of the accuracy of the bound can be > obtained from > > ftp://ftpeng.cisco.com/ftp/acharny/issll_vwg.ps > ftp://ftpeng.cisco.com/ftp/acharny/aggregate_delay.ps > > via anonymous ftp. > > > Apologies for the delay in posting it, > > Anna > > From owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Tue Jan 11 06:39:35 2000 Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA03641 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2000 06:39:35 -0500 (EST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id FAA32689 for issll-outgoing; Tue, 11 Jan 2000 05:42:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtp1.cluster.oleane.net ([195.25.12.16]) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id FAA01260 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2000 05:42:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from oleane (dyn-1-1-186.Vin.dialup.oleane.fr [195.25.4.186]) by smtp1.cluster.oleane.net with SMTP id LAA18920; Tue, 11 Jan 2000 11:40:20 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <007c01bf5c1f$e584f220$0401a8c0@oleane.com> From: "Peter Lewis" To: Subject: SIP 2000 Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 11:37:43 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0079_01BF5C28.461CC100" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0079_01BF5C28.461CC100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable SIP 2000: beyond H.323?=20 Discussing and debating in Paris May 10-12. A CFP is online at: http://www.upperside.fr/basip.htm ------=_NextPart_000_0079_01BF5C28.461CC100 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

SIP 2000: beyond H.323? =

Discussing and debating in Paris May = 10-12.

A CFP is online at:

http://www.upperside.fr/basip.= htm

------=_NextPart_000_0079_01BF5C28.461CC100-- From owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Tue Jan 11 09:35:19 2000 Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA10939 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2000 09:35:11 -0500 (EST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id IAA29287 for issll-outgoing; Tue, 11 Jan 2000 08:30:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from pilgrim.cisco.com (pilgrim.cisco.com [171.69.204.12]) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA06216 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2000 08:30:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from scharny1-nt (ch-janeiro-p19.cisco.com [171.69.209.223]) by pilgrim.cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA29125 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2000 08:29:29 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200001111329.IAA29125@pilgrim.cisco.com> X-Sender: acharny@pilgrim.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.2 Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 08:25:06 -0500 To: issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu From: Anna Charny Subject: RE: delay bounds over Diffserv cloud Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Hi, There appears to be a hole in the proof of the delay bound in the paper that I posted recently. As written, the proof does not handle a general topology case as I had previously thought. Thanks to Jim Roberts of France Telecom for pointing it out. At the moment it is not clear (at least to me) whether the bound itself is incorrect for a general network, or it is the proof that needs to be fixed. What is clear is that the bound for a general topology is at least as bad as shown in the paper - but at the moment there is a possibility that it can actually be worse for some topologies. Any insights or comments will be appreciated. Thanks, Anna >X-Sender: acharny@pilgrim.cisco.com >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.2 >Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2000 15:36:33 -0500 >To: issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu >From: Anna Charny >Subject: delay bounds over Diffserv cloud >Sender: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu >X-SMTP-HELO: mercury.lcs.mit.edu >X-SMTP-MAIL-FROM: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu >X-SMAP-Received-From: outside >X-SMTP-PEER-INFO: mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122] > >Hi, > >The slides from the meeting in D.C. regarding delay bounds over a Diffserv cloud, and a paper containing the proof of the bounds and anlysis of the accuracy of the bound can be obtained from > >ftp://ftpeng.cisco.com/ftp/acharny/issll_vwg.ps >ftp://ftpeng.cisco.com/ftp/acharny/aggregate_delay.ps > >via anonymous ftp. > > >Apologies for the delay in posting it, > >Anna > From owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Tue Jan 11 14:37:58 2000 Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA19358 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2000 14:37:03 -0500 (EST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA04108 for issll-outgoing; Tue, 11 Jan 2000 12:52:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from gate.colmar.uha.fr (nscolmar.colmar.uha.fr [194.167.108.34]) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA05763 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2000 12:52:00 -0500 (EST) From: conf@colmar.uha.fr Received: by gate.colmar.uha.fr; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id SAA12568; Tue, 11 Jan 2000 18:41:59 +0100 (MET) Received: from somewhere by smtpxd Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20000111184831.0090a970@colmar.colmar.uha.fr> X-Sender: conf@colmar.colmar.uha.fr X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 18:48:31 +0100 To: conf@colmar.colmar.uha.fr Subject: ECUMN - Extended Deadline Feb 11th. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mercury.lcs.mit.edu id MAA07078 Sender: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit My sincere apology if you receive multiple copies of this CFP. Please feel free to pass the CFP to anyone who might be interested. Kind regards, ------------------------------------------------------------------------- CALL FOR PAPERS 1st IEEE European Conference on Universal Multiservice Networks ECUMN'2000 IP Networks Versus Conventional Switched Networks October 2-4, 2000 - CREF, Colmar, France URL: http://iutsun1.colmar.uha.fr/ECUMN2000.html Sponsors are the following national scientific societies in Europe, which cooperate under the roof of: EUREL, Brussels, Belgium: AEI, Milano (Italy), IEE, London (UK), ÖVE/GIT, Vienna (Austria), SEE, Paris (France), SEV/ITG, Fehraltorf, (Switzerland), VDE/ITG, Frankfurt (Germany), WSES as well as the IEEE Communications and Computer. Supported by: France Telecom Alcatel Newbridge Other Supporters pending: Conference Scope: This conference follows the two successful ATM conferences events held in Colmar, France in 1998 and 1999. The conference scope has been extended to deal with the different topics related to Multiservice Network Architectures, and Implementation, including among others, protocols, signaling, traffic flow, addressing schemes, … Fundamental questions still have to find an answer, such as: How will the Internet, symbol of freedom, compete with the world of traditional carrier networks or cooperate with it? Will alternate Technologies be needed to meet high level quality of service requirements ? What restrictions, if any, will result on the desired degree of freedom ? Emphasis shall be put upon network convergence, including fixed/mobile convergence satisfying the needs of person to person communications, as well as Information and Entertainment applications. The scope of ECUMN'2000 encompasses but is not limited to: Evolution of Telecommunication Networks Architecture: * Core network * Access networks * CPN (Customer Premise Networks including home networks) * Multiservice mobile networks * Interoperability issues, Interfaces and Reference points Packet, frame and cell protocols: * Addressing * Multicasting * Switching and routing * Signaling * Traffic control and QoS Network management and control: * Network design - Migration strategies * Active networks versus Intelligent networks Service impact (multimedia, VPN, ...) on network architecture: * Fixed-Mobile Convergence * Packetized voice * Experimentation and fields trials With such a variety of problems to be solved, and such high economical interests at stake there is a definite interest to exchange ideas, technical results and proposals, between the academic and industrial communities and this is the major goal of the conference. Instructions for Authors: Mail four paper versions or E-mail preferably in Word 6 format, or alternately a postscript version of a 2000-word extended abstract summarizing an original work finalized or in progress. All the manuscripts must be written in English. The top of the first page of each paper should include the title of the paper, authors' name, position, address, telephone and fax numbers, Email of the author responsible for correspondence and a list of four keywords at least. Authors of accepted papers will be invited to submit full-length manuscripts for inclusion in the proceedings. All submitted papers should be sent to the following address: Pascal LORENZ University of Haute Alsace IUT - Department GTR 34 rue du Grillenbreit 68008 Colmar, France Phone: +33 389202366 Fax: +33 389202359 Mobile: +33 603658042 E-mail: lorenz@colmar.uha.fr Important Deadlines: Extended abstract due: February 11, 2000 Notification of acceptance: April 10, 2000 Camera-ready full papers due (2 columns, 8 pages max): June 10, 2000 Best papers will be forwarded for consideration in a special issue of the journal "Annals of telecommunications". A competition for the best student paper will be organized to recognize and encourage excellence in graduate studies. Tutorials: Tutorials will present overviews of current high interest topics. Proposals tutorials are due by February 11, 2000. Conference Committees General Chair: Pascal Lorenz (France) - University of Haute Alsace Technical Program Chair: Annie Gravey (France) - France Telecom Cnet Tutorials Chair: Sylvie Ritzenthaler (France) - Newbridge Learned Societies Liaison Chair: Renato Israel (France) - SEE Prosper Chemouil (France) - France Telecom Cnet Michel Levy (France) - Alcatel Jean-Louis Pernin (France) - Consultant Guy Pujolle (France) - University of Versailles-Saint-Quentin Pierre Rolin (France) - France Telecom Cnet Scientific Program Committee: H. Afifi (France) - ENST Bretagne E. Biersack (France) - Eurecom M. Boari (Italy) - University of Bologna D. Bonjour (France) - France Telecom Cnet T. Braun (Switzerland) - University of Berne P. Brown (France) - France Telecom Cnet P. Chemouil (France) - France Telecom Cnet G. Colombo (Italy) - CSELT J.P. Coudreuse (France) - Mitsubishi W. Dabbous (France) - INRIA A. Danthine (Belgium) - University libre of Liège M . Diaz (France) - LAAS M. Erradi (Morocco) - ENSIAS S. Fdida (France) - LIP6 F. Ferrero (Italy) - CSELT G. Fiche (France) - Alcatel CIT A. Gravey (France) - France Telecom Cnet S.J. Halme (Finland) - Helsinki University of Technology G. Hébuterne (France) - INT H.G. Hegering (Germany) - University of Munich D. Hutchinson (UK) - Lancaster R. Israel (France) - SEE A. Jajszczyk (Poland) - University of Mining & Metallurgy M. Joubert (France) - Cegetel F. Kamoun (Tunisia) - ENSI M. Karpov (Russia) - St Petersburg University P. Key (UK) - Microsoft D. Kofman (France) - ENST Paris U. Korner (Sweden) - University of Lund U . Krieger (Germany) - Deutsche Telecom P. Kuhn (Germany) - University of Stuttgart G.S. Kuo (Taiwan) - National Central University M. Labetoulle (France) - Institut Eurecom Sophia-Antipolis M. Le Boudec (Switzerland) - EPFL F. Le Faucheur (France) - Cisco G. Leduc (Belgium) - University of Liege Y. Legrand (France) - Bouygues M. Levy (France) - Alcatel P. Lorenz (France) - University of Haute Alsace M. Loukola (Finland) - Helsinki University of Technology B. Maglaris (Greece) - National Technical University Athens H. Maher (Switzerland) - EPFL Z. Mammeri (France) - University of Toulouse S. Martignoni (Switzerland) - Ascom TechLtd N. Mastorakis (Greece) - Military Institutions of University Education U. Mocci (Italy) - FUB M. Nunes (Portugal) - IST/INESC G. Omiyar (USA) - Computer Sciences Corp J.J. Pansiot (France) - University of Strasbourg J.L. Pernin (France) - Consultant G. Petit (Belgium) - Alcatel Anvers M. Potts (Switzerland) - Martel G. Pujolle (France) - University of Versailles-Saint-Quentin S. Rao (Switzerland) - TELSCOM M. Renaldo (France) - SAGEM M. Riguidel (France) - Thomson S. Ritzenthaler (France) - Newbridge J. Roberts (France) - France Telecom Cnet P. Rolin (France) - France Telecom Cnet R. Schutz (France) - CS Telecom H. Tobiet (France) - Clemessy S. Tohme (France) - ENST Paris L. Toutain (France) - ENST Bretagne P. Tran Gia (Germany) - University of Würzburg P. Van Heck (The Netherlands) - Erasmus University P. Van Mieghem (The Netherlands) - Delft University of Technology E. Vazquez Gallo (Spain) - University of Madrid V.A. Villagra (Spain) - University of Madrid M. Villen (Spain) - Telefonica I+D From owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Mon Jan 17 05:28:32 2000 Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA29266 for ; Mon, 17 Jan 2000 05:28:31 -0500 (EST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id EAA28097 for issll-outgoing; Mon, 17 Jan 2000 04:14:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from teco68pc.teco.uni-karlsruhe.de (teco68pc.teco.uni-karlsruhe.de [129.13.170.68]) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAA24503 for ; Mon, 17 Jan 2000 04:13:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from teco154pc (teco154pc.teco.uni-karlsruhe.de [129.13.170.154]) by teco68pc.teco.uni-karlsruhe.de with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2448.0) id CL8GFNPG; Mon, 17 Jan 2000 10:10:37 +0100 Reply-To: From: "Albrecht Schmidt" To: , , , , , , , , , , , , , "Hans-Werner Gellersen" , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Cc: "Albrecht Schmidt" , Subject: CfP: Situated Interaction in Ubiquitous Computing Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 10:10:17 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit (Please apologize, if you receive multiple copies of this CfP) Workshop on ‘Situated Interaction in Ubiquitous Computing’ (http://www.teco.edu/chi2000ws/) at CHI 2000, April 3, 2000, The Hague, Netherlands (http://www.acm.org/chi2000) Workshop Proceedings to be published by Springer as Special Issue of Journal "Personal Technologies" (http://www.csm.uwe.ac.uk/cpim/PeTe.html) IMPORTANT DATES 28 January 2000 Extended Abstracts and Position papers must be received 4 February 2000 Notification to authors 3 April 2000 Workshop at CHI2000 OVERVIEW This workshop will bring together researchers and practitioners who are concerned with design, development, and implementation of novel interfaces for mobile devices and environment-based appliances. The availability of sensing technology provides the opportunity to include information about the situation of use as well as the surrounding environment (e.g. location, proximity, physical conditions, social setting, context, etc.) in human computer interaction. Situated interaction is especially attractive for mobile devices that are used while on the move e.g. - PDAs - wearable computers - smart mobile phones, and for shared appliances in common spaces, e.g. - city information systems, - ticket machines, - self-service check-in counters. The main goal of the workshop is to develop an understanding of how the situation of use influences the interaction process. TOPICS OF INTEREST INCLUDE: * Adaptation of input and output modalities to the situation of use * New interaction metaphors that include situation and context * Design rules and principles for context-aware systems and user interfaces * Design methodologies for developing situation-aware user interfaces * User-centered approaches to the design of situation-aware systems and interfaces * User models that help predict the behavior of users of situation-aware systems * Studies of adaptive and situation-aware user interfaces * Mechanisms and technologies for extracting, interpreting and using context information * Adaptation strategies that help to reduce the need for input or output * Strategies for choosing interruption time and mode appropriate to the situation * Interfaces for mobile devices that make use of information about the environment and the user's situation * User interface agents and active user interfaces * The use of situation and context in CSCW and groupware * Adaptive interfaces for users with disabilities * Adaptive multimodal user interfaces SUBMISSION DETAILS We encourage submissions from researchers and practitioners in academia, industry, government, and consulting. Authors are invited to submit an extended abstract (about 2000 words) describing original work in one or more of the areas listed above, or a position paper (about one page) highlighting the authors' interests. Please be specific about the status of the work and why you believe it should be of interest to the workshop audience. Submissions should be mailed in PDF or postscript format to Albrecht Schmidt (albrecht@teco.edu) at the University of Karlsruhe by the end of the day on 28 February 2000. All submissions will be reviewed and some of the submitters will be invited to present their ideas at the workshop. Participants will be selected based on the quality of the work and its likelihood to spur interesting discussion. Authors of accepted extended abstracts will be asked to present their work at the workshop. PUBLICATION The results of this workshop will be published in a special issue of the Springer Journal ‘Personal Technologies’ (http://www.csm.uwe.ac.uk/cpim/PeTe.html). Following the workshop all authors of extended abstracts will be invited to resubmit their abstracts as short papers to be reviewed for inclusion in this special issue. The review committee will consist of 10 recognized leaders of the HCI community and related fields. WORKSHOP ORGANIZATION The workshop will last one full day and will be limited to 20 participants. Accepted submissions will be made available online prior to the workshop and will also be distributed during the workshop. The workshop will consist of two parts. During the first part participants will present current research, while the second part is reserved for discussion. A set of possible discussion topics will be generated in advance from a questionnaire that will be sent to each participant prior to the workshop. WORKSHOP CHAIRS Albrecht Schmidt, Telecooperation Office (TecO), University of Karlsruhe, Germany Walter Van de Velde, Starlab Nv/Sa, Belgium Gerd Kortuem, Department of Computer Science, University of Oregon, USA For questions and further information, please contact Albrecht Schmidt Telecooperation Office (TecO) University of Karlsruhe Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str. 1 76131 Karlsruhe (Germany) Phone: +49 721 6902-29 Fax: +49 721 966 3418 Email: albrecht@teco.edu Workshop page: http://www.teco.edu/chi2000ws/ CHI2000 page: http://www.acm.org/sigchi/chi2000/ From owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Thu Jan 20 14:04:13 2000 Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA12256 for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 14:04:12 -0500 (EST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA07468 for issll-outgoing; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 12:56:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from mex.italtel.it (mex.italtel.it [138.132.117.4]) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA10343 for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 12:56:35 -0500 (EST) Received: .(iltws72 [138.132.52.82]) by mex.italtel.it (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id SAA03257 Received: .(localhost [127.0.0.1]) by iltws72.settimo.italtel.it (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA05419 Received: from ic8u32.settimo.italtel.it (ic8u32.settimo.italtel.it [138.132.1.1]) by mix.italtel.it (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA21083; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 18:54:03 +0100 (MET) Received: by ic8u32.settimo.italtel.it id AA08988; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 19:11:27 +0100 Received: from ic1daj.settimo.italtel.it by ilt9h01.settimo.italtel.it with SMTP (1.38.193.5/16.2) id AA26134; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 18:48:19 +0100 Message-Id: <38874A8F.F8A5F27F@italtel.it> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 18:49:03 +0100 From: Giuseppe Ricagni X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en Mime-Version: 1.0 To: Anna Charny Cc: issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Subject: Re: delay bounds over Diffserv cloud References: <200001111329.IAA29125@pilgrim.cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Anna, Anna Charny wrote: > Hi, > > There appears to be a hole in the proof of the delay bound in the paper that I posted recently. As written, the proof does not handle a general topology case as I had previously thought. Thanks to Jim Roberts of France Telecom for pointing it out. > > At the moment it is not clear (at least to me) whether the bound itself is incorrect for a general network, or it is the proof that needs to be fixed. What is clear is that the bound for a general topology is at least as bad as shown in the paper - but at the moment there is a possibility that it can actually be worse for some topologies. > > Any insights or comments will be appreciated. > > Thanks, > Anna > Would you mind re-posting some readable postscript/PDF/ppt/pps/whatever version of the slides so that we can provide such insights/comments ? Thank you very much Giuseppe Ricagni > > >X-Sender: acharny@pilgrim.cisco.com > >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.2 > >Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2000 15:36:33 -0500 > >To: issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu > >From: Anna Charny > >Subject: delay bounds over Diffserv cloud > >Sender: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu > >X-SMTP-HELO: mercury.lcs.mit.edu > >X-SMTP-MAIL-FROM: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu > >X-SMAP-Received-From: outside > >X-SMTP-PEER-INFO: mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122] > > > >Hi, > > > >The slides from the meeting in D.C. regarding delay bounds over a Diffserv cloud, and a paper containing the proof of the bounds and anlysis of the accuracy of the bound can be obtained from > > > >ftp://ftpeng.cisco.com/ftp/acharny/issll_vwg.ps > >ftp://ftpeng.cisco.com/ftp/acharny/aggregate_delay.ps > > > >via anonymous ftp. > > > > > >Apologies for the delay in posting it, > > > >Anna > > -- ---------------------------------------------------------- Giuseppe RICAGNI System Architecture and Product Planning Broadband Networks Italtel via Reiss Romoli - C10 20019 Castelletto di Settimo Milanese (MILANO) ITALY mailto:giuseppe.ricagni@italtel.it ---------------------------------------------------------- From owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Thu Jan 20 23:46:37 2000 Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA21776 for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 23:46:37 -0500 (EST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA10441 for issll-outgoing; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 22:43:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from pilgrim.cisco.com (pilgrim.cisco.com [171.69.204.12]) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id WAA12284 for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 22:43:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from scharny1-nt ([161.44.189.106]) by pilgrim.cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA06056; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 22:42:28 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200001210342.WAA06056@pilgrim.cisco.com> X-Sender: acharny@pilgrim.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.2 Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 22:37:42 -0500 To: Giuseppe Ricagni From: Anna Charny Subject: Re: delay bounds over Diffserv cloud Cc: issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu In-Reply-To: <38874A8F.F8A5F27F@italtel.it> References: <200001111329.IAA29125@pilgrim.cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Giuseppe, I am working on correcting the document at the moment. It will be reposted as soon as I am done (hopefully very soon). Thanks, Anna At 06:49 PM 1/20/00 +0100, Giuseppe Ricagni wrote: >Hello Anna, > > >Anna Charny wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> There appears to be a hole in the proof of the delay bound in the paper that I posted recently. As written, the proof does not handle a general topology case as I had previously thought. Thanks to Jim Roberts of France Telecom for pointing it out. >> >> At the moment it is not clear (at least to me) whether the bound itself is incorrect for a general network, or it is the proof that needs to be fixed. What is clear is that the bound for a general topology is at least as bad as shown in the paper - but at the moment there is a possibility that it can actually be worse for some topologies. >> >> Any insights or comments will be appreciated. >> >> Thanks, >> Anna >> > >Would you mind re-posting some readable postscript/PDF/ppt/pps/whatever version of the slides so that we can provide such insights/comments ? > >Thank you very much >Giuseppe Ricagni > > >> >> >X-Sender: acharny@pilgrim.cisco.com >> >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.2 >> >Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2000 15:36:33 -0500 >> >To: issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu >> >From: Anna Charny >> >Subject: delay bounds over Diffserv cloud >> >Sender: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu >> >X-SMTP-HELO: mercury.lcs.mit.edu >> >X-SMTP-MAIL-FROM: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu >> >X-SMAP-Received-From: outside >> >X-SMTP-PEER-INFO: mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122] >> > >> >Hi, >> > >> >The slides from the meeting in D.C. regarding delay bounds over a Diffserv cloud, and a paper containing the proof of the bounds and anlysis of the accuracy of the bound can be obtained from >> > >> >ftp://ftpeng.cisco.com/ftp/acharny/issll_vwg.ps >> >ftp://ftpeng.cisco.com/ftp/acharny/aggregate_delay.ps >> > >> >via anonymous ftp. >> > >> > >> >Apologies for the delay in posting it, >> > >> >Anna >> > > >-- >---------------------------------------------------------- >Giuseppe RICAGNI >System Architecture and Product Planning >Broadband Networks >Italtel >via Reiss Romoli - C10 >20019 Castelletto di Settimo Milanese (MILANO) >ITALY > >mailto:giuseppe.ricagni@italtel.it >---------------------------------------------------------- > From owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Sun Jan 23 22:34:04 2000 Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA15507 for ; Sun, 23 Jan 2000 22:34:04 -0500 (EST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA21101 for issll-outgoing; Sun, 23 Jan 2000 21:28:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from betelgeuse.advanced.org (betelgeuse.advanced.org [199.222.103.10]) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id VAA08820 for ; Sun, 23 Jan 2000 21:28:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from internet2.edu (p02-29.stamford.dialin.ntplx.com [204.213.186.79]) by betelgeuse.advanced.org (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id VAA12496 for ; Sun, 23 Jan 2000 21:28:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <388BB8D5.DAC30D1C@internet2.edu> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 21:28:37 -0500 From: Ben Teitelbaum Organization: Internet2 (UCAID) / Advanced Network & Services X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.13 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Subject: First Joint Internet2 / Department of Energy QoS Workshop Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit --------------------------------------------------------------------- Reminder: Hotel Room Blocks Released After January 25th, 2000 (Tues) --------------------------------------------------------------------- First Joint Internet2 / Department of Energy QoS Workshop "QBone: Early Experiences and the Road Ahead" February 9-10, 2000 Texas Medical Center Houston, Texas Sponsored by the Texas GigaPoP http://www.internet2.edu/qos/houston2000 --------------------------------------------------------------------- News: o Draft program now available (see below) o Eighty registered attendees so far! o Pre-registration closes January 29th, 2000 o Affiliation with an Internet2 member, partner, sponsor, or international peer organization required Apology: o Sincere apologies if you are spammed with multiple copies of this mail! --------------------------------------------------------------------- This workshop will take stock of the progress that the QBone initiative has made toward realizing Internet2 QoS goals, characterize the challenges that lay ahead, and increase understanding of how recent QoS research and standards work might be leveraged to accelerate the development of production QoS services throughout Internet2 and the emerging next generation internet (NGI) infrastructure. It is expected that there will be strong representation from campus network planners, advanced applications developers, chief information officers (CIOs), gigaPoP planners, US federal mission networks, NGI investigators, and members of the network research community. A program committee chaired by John Wroclawski (MIT) is building the technical program in cooperation with the Internet2 QoS Working Group. Suggestions for speakers, panels, or BOFs are encouraged and should be made to the chair. Program DRAFT AGENDA (Version of Jan 22, 2000) Wednesday February 9th, 2000 8:00 - 9:00 Registration 9:00 - 9:30 Keynote Presentation Internet 2 QoS Perspective and Plans Ben Teitelbaum (Internet2) 9:30 - 10:30 Experimental Network Evaluation Results Requirements for a Bandwidth Broker Supporting High-Performance TCP Flows Volker Sander (Argonne National Laboratory) Experiments with Differentiated Services at iCAIR Brian Carpenter, Dilip Kandlur, Joe Mambretti (IBM and iCAIR) 10:30 - Break 11:00 11:00 - Bandwidth Brokers 12:30 The Siemens Bandwidth Broker Rudi Stelzl (Siemens) GARA: A Quality of Service Architecture Alain Roy (The University of Chicago) The Role of BB in traffic engineering Andreas Terzis 12:30 - 2:00 Lunch 2:00 - 3:30 Applications TBD TBD TBD 3:30 - 4:00 Break 4:00 - 5:30 Experimental Network Evaluation Results II Delay and Delay Variation Measurements in a DS Test Network Tiziana Ferrari The NASA QBed: A Prototype Differentiated Services Network George Uhl (NASA Goddard) ESNET Experiments and Results Joseph Burrescia (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory) EMERGE Experiments and Results [working title] Linda Winkler (Argonne National Laboratory) Thursday, February 10th, 2000 8:30 - 9:00 Keynote Presentation A Host Vendor's Perspective on QoS Yoram Bernet (Microsoft) 9:00 - 10:00 Voice, Video, and Multimedia IP DiffServ Architecture for Providing Voice/Video QoS Guarantees Mario Gerla and Gianluca Reali (UCLA) Objective Estimation of Video and Speech Quality to Support Network QoS Efforts Stephen Voran (Institute for Telecommunication Sciences) 10:00 - Break 10:30 10:30 - QoS Signaling and Middleware 12:00 Middleware Adaptive Management and Control for End-to-End QoS Alia Atlas (BBN) Design and Implementation of QoS Enabled OO Middleware Vishal Kachroo,Yamuna Krishnamurthy, Fred Kuhns (WUSTL) Lightweight Signaling [working title] Stewart Fallis (BT Advanced Communications Research) 12:00 - 1:30 Lunch 1:30 - 3:30 New Directions How QBone Can Go Wireless Börje Olmann (Ericsson) QoS Services with Dynamic Packet State Ion Stoika (CMU) QoSWG BB Framework Proposal [working title] Philip Chimento (University of Twente) Panel Discussion: "What's Next for the QBone?" 3:30 Adjourn Important Dates December 22nd, 1999 Talk Proposals Due January 18th, 2000 Notification of Acceptance / Agenda Finalized January 25th, 2000 Hotel Room Block Released February 2nd, 2000 Session Talks Due February 9th-10th, Workshop 2000 Background & Goals Since May 1998, the Internet2 project has focused on a QoS strategy that builds upon the work of the IETF differentiated services architecture (DiffServ) to engineer scalable interdomain QoS services in support of QoS-needy Internet2 applications. In November 1998, the QBone initiative was launched to develop and deploy an architecture for exploring the engineering and science of new IP network services in the context of an interdomain testbed that makes new QoS services incrementally available to the developers and users of advanced applications. This workshop will take stock of the progress that has been made toward realizing the QBone, characterize the challenges that lay ahead, and understand how recent QoS research and standards work might be leveraged to accelerate the development of production QoS services throughout Internet2. The Internet2 QoS Working Group outlined QoS requirements for the project in May 1998 that remain as valid today as they were then. Foremost among these are: 1) relevance towards meeting the needs of advanced applications; 2) scalability to high forwarding rates, large numbers of QoS-enabled flows, and large numbers of hosts/users (administrative scalability); 3) interoperability between heterogeneous network clouds and between individual network elements from multiple vendors. The IETF DiffServ architecture offers a basis for meeting these requirements, while leaving many design questions for the individual network or user. The contribution of the QBone is to explore a design space empirically within the Internet2 environment that includes such questions as: * Which services are most useful to which classes of application and can those services be provided within the current architectural model? * Are more sophisticated per-hop behaviors (PHBs) or edge conditioning devices required? * What are the best techniques and technologies for engineering DiffServ campus/gigaPoP/backbone networks? * What are the obstacles to deploying new, advanced IP QoS services across independently administered Internet2 and NGI networks. * What is an appropriate signaling model for establishing end-to-end interdomain reservations? And, is it useful to have more than one--for example, to support both signaled long-term contracts and signalled on-demand spot reservations? * How should the network and/or applications be instrumented to provide the measurements necessary to debug, audit, and analyze the performance of new DiffServ services? These and other issues are being investigated by network planners, engineers, and researchers in the context of the QBone initiative and in the IETF. In the first year of the QBone, significant progress has been made in many areas. In others, however, there remain many hard problems. It is an explicit goal of this workshop to communicate the experiences and insights of those who have been directly involved to those who are potential customers of QoS technology, researchers and developers working in related areas, and network planners, administrators, and strategists. Specifically, it is hoped that there be strong representation from: campus network planners, advanced applications developers, chief information officers (CIOs), gigaPoP planners, US federal mission networks, NGI investigators, and members of the network research community. Each of these groups has a distinct and valuable perspective to offer. Proposals for presentations or panels should be submitted to the program committee no later than December 22, 1999. Potential topics of interest include: * Progress reports on the design and specification of: o QBone Architecture; o QBone Measurement Architecture; o QBone Bandwidth Broker Trials; * Experience reports from network engineers implementing the QBone architecture in different environments; * Related QoS testbed projects and efforts to assure interoperability between them; * Experience reports from applications developers and users who have begun to evaluate the performance of new QBone services in the context of specific application needs; * Design and development reports from the implementors of new QoS network management tools (i.e. bandwidth brokers); * Surveys of relevant standards activities; * Reports on relevant recent networking research; * Short "outrageous opinions" statements ; Program Committee * John Wroclawski (MIT, Chair) * Yoram Bernet (Microsoft) * Scott Bradner (Harvard) * Steve Corbato (Univ. of Washington) * Bruce Davie (Cisco) * Ian Foster (ANL / Univ. of Chicago) * Jaron Lanier (Advanced Network & Services) * Ben Teitelbaum (Internet2) * Linda Winkler (ANL) * Hui Zhang (CMU) Internet2 QoS Working Group The Internet2 QoS working group has been actively working to advance the state of QoS deployments throughout Internet2 since Fall 1997. A complete list of membership may be found here: http://www.internet2.edu/qos/wg/members/members.html Local Arrangements A block of local hotel rooms has been reserved. More information may be found here: http://www.internet2.edu/qos/houston2000/#hotels Registration For planning purposes, pre-registration by January 26th, 2000 is strongly encouraged. To register, please visit: http://www.internet2.edu/qos/houston2000/#registration From owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Mon Jan 24 17:27:29 2000 Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA27521 for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2000 17:27:25 -0500 (EST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id QAA23467 for issll-outgoing; Mon, 24 Jan 2000 16:02:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from tnt.isi.edu (tnt.isi.edu [128.9.128.128]) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA25115 for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2000 16:02:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from gra.isi.edu (gra.isi.edu [128.9.160.133]) by tnt.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id NAA21590; Mon, 24 Jan 2000 13:02:43 -0800 (PST) From: Bob Braden Received: (from braden@localhost) by gra.isi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.6) id VAA07818; Mon, 24 Jan 2000 21:02:43 GMT Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 21:02:43 GMT Message-Id: <200001242102.VAA07818@gra.isi.edu> To: yoramb@exchange.microsoft.com, Joakim.F.Bergkvist@telia.se, braden@isi.edu, Lars.Westberg@era-t.ericsson.se Subject: Re: [Diffserv] QoSSIG BOF Cc: rsvp@isi.edu, issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII Sender: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Precedence: bulk *> From Lars.Westberg@era-t.ericsson.se Mon Jan 24 01:40:50 2000 *> From: Lars.Westberg@era-t.ericsson.se (Lars Westberg T/NI 2) *> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 10:40:39 +0100 (MET) *> To: yoramb@exchange.microsoft.com, Joakim.F.Bergkvist@telia.se, braden@ISI.EDU *> Subject: Re: [Diffserv] QoSSIG BOF *> Cc: rsvp@ISI.EDU, diffserv@ietf.org, end2end-interest@ISI.EDU, *> issll@lcs.mit.edu *> X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII *> Content-Length: 1338 *> X-Lines: 34 *> *> Hi! *> We have a need for a low cost solution, but our problem is not Lars, I would like to understand what you are saying. "Low cost" in terms of what metric? And what are the economic imperatives that require "low cost"? *> end-to-end. We would rather like to solve a intra-domain solution *> or edge-to-edge solution. I don't get how you plan to bridge the gap between the ultimate end users -- the folks who want to make telephone calls -- and your network edges. Is there to be a different signaling protocol for the edges? The same, or a different one, between administrative domains (sounds awfully like X.25 and X.75, doesn't it?) *> Our need is much simplier than solving reservation *> from a host-to-network or between different administrative domains. *> Our edge could be an edge-router or gateway. *> But you agree that *somebody* has to solve "reservation from a host-to-network or between different administrative domains"? If the pieces are separately designed, how do you see their fitting together? *> We are assuming that this method should be a complement to the QOS-tool-box *> for some dedicated networks with certain characteristic and not for all kinds *> of networks. I am not sure what this means. Could you elaborate? *> *> We are mostly interested of QOS for Real-time traffic such as voice. Curiously, this is exactly the reason behind the int-serv/RSVP development, while diffserv is mostly after a different problem. *> *> Our basic problems are: *> *> * High volume of speech-traffic. The reservation scheme has to support up to *> 70-90% of voice traffic. *> You don't believe people will use the communication facilities for anything but voice? No online shopping? *> * Edge-to-edge reservation within one adminstrative domain, not end-to-end. *> *> * Mobility. Our traffic is moving between different areas in the network. *> semipermanent trunk allocation implies need for more transmission and *> O&M. Cost for operation and maintenance might be the biggest issue. *> Sorry, I didn't quite understand this. *> * Fast reservation. The time between request and acknowledgement *> of the reservation should be in the order of the forwarding delay. *> You have not mentioned multicast, which is the primary reason for RSVP complexity. Do you believe in multicasting? Thanks, Bob Braden *> We have as well a draft (a marker based scheme, you can find it in the library) *> but I would be very interested to get other proposals from other peoples. *> *> *> Regards Lars Westberg *> Ericsson Research *> From owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Tue Jan 25 03:54:57 2000 Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA20340 for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2000 03:54:56 -0500 (EST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id CAA20665 for issll-outgoing; Tue, 25 Jan 2000 02:47:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from penguin.wise.edt.ericsson.se (penguin-ext.wise.edt.ericsson.se [194.237.142.110]) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id CAA27564 for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2000 02:47:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from era-t.ericsson.se (koff.ericsson.se [147.214.173.137]) by penguin.wise.edt.ericsson.se (8.9.3/8.9.3/WIREfire-1.5) with SMTP id IAA19652; Tue, 25 Jan 2000 08:47:35 +0100 (MET) Received: from betz by era-t.ericsson.se (SMI-8.6/LME-DOM-2.2.5(ERA/T)) id IAA27255; Tue, 25 Jan 2000 08:47:35 +0100 From: Lars.Westberg@era-t.ericsson.se (Lars Westberg T/NI 2) Received: by betz (8.8.8+Sun/client-1.3) id IAA25049; Tue, 25 Jan 2000 08:47:34 +0100 (MET) Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 08:47:34 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <200001250747.IAA25049@betz> To: Zoltan.Turanyi@eth.ericsson.se Subject: Re: [Diffserv] QoSSIG BOF Cc: rsvp@isi.edu, issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII Sender: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Hi I will respond. Commenst ? Lasse w. Hi! As other has mentioned that a simpler problem definition might give a simpler solution. The network I consider will 1) tunnel end-user traffic and 2) transport traffic which is generated by GW;s at the edges. The host might use RSVP to request resources but the tunneling/GW network in this case is an edge-to-edge network. The edge is defined by the GW:s and the edge-routers. My question is related to this network. In some of the wireless network we have significantly more voice traffic that in the people forecasts in future Internet backbone. In our traffic profile we could have 70-90% speech traffic. This one of our issues that I need to solve. It can treated as a problem for some network categories, but it is an very important in our case. From my perspective I consider this as the simpler problem than end-to-end reservation. I am new in the area and I trying to find solutions for this problem. What would you recommend ? - Lasse ----- Begin Included Message ----- From owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Mon Jan 24 22:06:57 2000 From: Bob Braden Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 21:02:43 GMT To: yoramb@exchange.microsoft.com, Joakim.F.Bergkvist@telia.se, braden@isi.edu, Lars.Westberg@era-t.ericsson.se Subject: Re: [Diffserv] QoSSIG BOF Cc: rsvp@isi.edu, issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu *> From Lars.Westberg@era-t.ericsson.se Mon Jan 24 01:40:50 2000 *> From: Lars.Westberg@era-t.ericsson.se (Lars Westberg T/NI 2) *> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 10:40:39 +0100 (MET) *> To: yoramb@exchange.microsoft.com, Joakim.F.Bergkvist@telia.se, braden@ISI.EDU *> Subject: Re: [Diffserv] QoSSIG BOF *> Cc: rsvp@ISI.EDU, diffserv@ietf.org, end2end-interest@ISI.EDU, *> issll@lcs.mit.edu *> X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII *> Content-Length: 1338 *> X-Lines: 34 *> *> Hi! *> We have a need for a low cost solution, but our problem is not Lars, I would like to understand what you are saying. "Low cost" in terms of what metric? And what are the economic imperatives that require "low cost"? *> end-to-end. We would rather like to solve a intra-domain solution *> or edge-to-edge solution. I don't get how you plan to bridge the gap between the ultimate end users -- the folks who want to make telephone calls -- and your network edges. Is there to be a different signaling protocol for the edges? The same, or a different one, between administrative domains (sounds awfully like X.25 and X.75, doesn't it?) *> Our need is much simplier than solving reservation *> from a host-to-network or between different administrative domains. *> Our edge could be an edge-router or gateway. *> But you agree that *somebody* has to solve "reservation from a host-to-network or between different administrative domains"? If the pieces are separately designed, how do you see their fitting together? *> We are assuming that this method should be a complement to the QOS-tool-box *> for some dedicated networks with certain characteristic and not for all kinds *> of networks. I am not sure what this means. Could you elaborate? *> *> We are mostly interested of QOS for Real-time traffic such as voice. Curiously, this is exactly the reason behind the int-serv/RSVP development, while diffserv is mostly after a different problem. *> *> Our basic problems are: *> *> * High volume of speech-traffic. The reservation scheme has to support up to *> 70-90% of voice traffic. *> You don't believe people will use the communication facilities for anything but voice? No online shopping? *> * Edge-to-edge reservation within one adminstrative domain, not end-to-end. *> *> * Mobility. Our traffic is moving between different areas in the network. *> semipermanent trunk allocation implies need for more transmission and *> O&M. Cost for operation and maintenance might be the biggest issue. *> Sorry, I didn't quite understand this. *> * Fast reservation. The time between request and acknowledgement *> of the reservation should be in the order of the forwarding delay. *> You have not mentioned multicast, which is the primary reason for RSVP complexity. Do you believe in multicasting? Thanks, Bob Braden *> We have as well a draft (a marker based scheme, you can find it in the library) *> but I would be very interested to get other proposals from other peoples. *> *> *> Regards Lars Westberg *> Ericsson Research *> ----- End Included Message ----- From owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Wed Jan 26 07:29:05 2000 Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA01949 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2000 07:29:04 -0500 (EST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id FAA28422 for issll-outgoing; Wed, 26 Jan 2000 05:33:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtp2.cluster.oleane.net (smtp2.cluster.oleane.net [195.25.12.17]) by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id FAA26239 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2000 05:33:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from oleane (dyn-1-1-250.Vin.dialup.oleane.fr [195.25.4.250]) by smtp2.cluster.oleane.net with SMTP id LAA41950; Wed, 26 Jan 2000 11:31:40 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <008601bf67e8$1fef18e0$0401a8c0@oleane.com> From: "Peter Lewis" To: Subject: SIP 2000 Call for Paper Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 11:28:41 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0083_01BF67F0.7F6990E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: owner-issll@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0083_01BF67F0.7F6990E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable SIP 2000: Beyond H.323? A scientific committe composed of the most = eminent experts in this technology will review the abstracts submitted = from the Call For Papers: http://www.upperside.fr/basip.htm Take a look at the exhibition list. ------=_NextPart_000_0083_01BF67F0.7F6990E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

SIP 2000: Beyond H.323? A scientific = committe=20 composed of the most eminent experts in this technology will review the=20 abstracts submitted from the Call For Papers:

http://www.upperside.fr/basip.= htm

Take a look at the exhibition=20 list.

------=_NextPart_000_0083_01BF67F0.7F6990E0--