RE: bandwidth reservation
"Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.tewg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi Vladimir, > In my opinion, Draft's [1] claim of the beneficial effect of bandwidth > protection through reservation can be strengthen by referring to [2]. > > As it has been pointed out in [1], bandwidth reservation is beneficial for > heavily and maybe moderately loaded networks. However, for lightly loaded > network complete bandwidth sharing is superior to bandwidth reservation. > The question remains what is the right strategy if load is uncertain, as > in a case of default parameter setting or highly volatile load. Obviously, > load uncertainty creates risks of bandwidth over and under-provisioning. > The risk of over-provisioning is realized if bandwidth reservation is > employed in expectation of high load, while the actual load is light. > In opposite case the risk of under-provisioning is realized. > > Paper [2] has quantified these risks and proposed to optimize the default > parameters by minimizing the worst-case scenario risk. The main conclusion > of [2] is that increase in the load uncertainty increases risk of bandwidth > under-provisioning and thus strengthen case for bandwidth protection > through reservation, especially in default setting context. > ... > Ref. > [1] http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tewg-diff-te-mar-00.txt > [2] V. Marbukh, "Network management under incomplete information on the > operational environment," IEEE Int. Symp. on Information Theory and its > Applications (ISITA2000), Honolulu, Hawaii, 2000. Thank you for your comments. The work you describe in Ref. [2] sounds interesting. Do you have a link to the paper, or, if not, could you send me the paper directly (in a private email)? Good to hear from you. Thanks, Jerry