Cell Relay Archive

["ronald h. davis" <ronaldd@lucent.com>]

Scott Brim wrote:
> 
> The CIF spec explicitly said that realtime QoS parameters were only
> appropriate on point-to-point (switched) Ethernet connections, and that on
> shared Ethernet only UBR and limited use of ABR made sense.  CIF was always
> targeted at switched Ethernet. I said that, although not so clearly, in a
> previous message.  Of course you might have congestion in the ends of the
> link, but that's true of any interface, and is up to queuing to deal with
> appropriately.  OK?
> 

fair enough, but queueing is not necessarily qos.  for instance, fifo
queueing isn't qos because it doesn't prioritize traffic to determine
whether some packets should be delivered first regardless of order of
arrival.  lacking a lan which implements some notion of qos (and i
don't know if there were proposals out at the time that the cif spec
came out 3 or so years ago) it is fair to say that cif does not support
end-to-end qos as was previously suggested.

-- 
  __  ______  __  / __/ |       lucent technologies, naperville il, usa
_/ (_(_) / (_(_/_/_(_/  .       ronald.h.davis@lucent.com
author of "atm for public networks" published by mcgraw-hill
     http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0071344764