nanog mailing list archives
Re: QOS or more bandwidth
From: Pete Kruckenberg <pete () kruckenberg com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 08:44:19 -0600 (MDT)
On Tue, 29 May 2001, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
Although I generally agree, how does one keep QoS out of the core for CBR and jitter-sensitive applications?I would disagree and argue that your core needs to be running top of the range routers with fat pipes with spare bandwidth, for a large network if you run out of CPU or bandwidth your routers will simply fall over. If you have sufficient bandwidth and your routers are running smoothly then there is no use for QoS hence I wouldnt use it (plus it will slow down the routing process).
QoS isn't just about queueing algorithms and transmit reordering. QoS-triggered path selection (a la MPLS-TE, PBR) can be an equally compelling motivation, if the network is built for differentiated services (which most aren't today, since a packet is a packet is a packet). This would make most sense in the core, of course. Pete.
Current thread:
- QOS or more bandwidth Sean Donelan (May 28)
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth Fletcher E Kittredge (May 29)
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth Stephen J. Wilcox (May 29)
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth E.B. Dreger (May 29)
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth Stephen J. Wilcox (May 29)
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth Pete Kruckenberg (May 29)
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth Stephen J. Wilcox (May 29)
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth Fletcher E Kittredge (May 29)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth Frank Coluccio (May 29)
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth Ukyo Kuonji (May 29)
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth Pete Kruckenberg (May 29)
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth Sean M. Doran (May 29)
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth RJ Atkinson (May 29)
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth Sean M. Doran (May 29)
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth Irwin Lazar (May 29)
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth bmanning (May 29)
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth RJ Atkinson (May 29)
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth Bill Woodcock (May 29)