Subject: [PCN] 3-in-1: minor nits

From: Michael Menth <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2011 23:10:52 +0200

Hi Toby and all,

Section 4.2

"If a PCN node Threshold-marks the outer header of a tunnelled packet with a
Not-marked codepoint on the inner header, the legacy decapsulator will 
revert
the Threshold-marking to Not-marked."

->

"... will revert the Threshold-marked inner codepoint to Not-marked."

Section 6.2

"However, thre is no known deployment of such an implementation and no 
reason
to believe that such an implementation would ever have been built. 
Therefore,
it seems safe to ignore this issue."

->

"However, there is no known deployment of such an implementation to date.
Therefore, it seems safe to ignore this issue."

Appendix B

"Two mechanisms can be used to identify such traffic:
  a. flow signalling associates a filterspec with a need for admission 
control (e.g. through RSVP or some equivalent message, e.g. from a SIP 
server to the ingress), and the PCN-ingress remarks traffic matching 
that filterspec to a PCN-compatible DSCP, as its chosen admission 
control mechanism.
  b. Traffic arrives with a DSCP that implies it requires admission 
control such as VOICE-ADMIT [RFC5865] or Interactive Real-Time, 
Broadcast TV when used for video on demand, and Multimedia Conferencing
[RFC4594][RFC5865]."

This needs reformulation since the two bullets do not enumerate 
mechanisms. Am I right that signalling and admission control is needed 
in both cases?

Regards,

     Michael

-- 
Prof. Dr. habil. Michael Menth
University of Tuebingen
Faculty of Science
Department of Computer Science
Chair of Communication Networks
Sand 13, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany
phone: (+49)-7071/29-70505
fax: (+49)-7071/29-5220
mailto:[email-masked]
http://www-kn.informatik.uni-tuebingen.de