The IP Over NBMA (ION) Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>ION Archive>month:1996-Jun> msg00153



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

comments on draft-ietf-iplpdn-frmib-dte-07.txt

  • From: roy.spitzer@adn.alcatel.com (Roy Spitzer)
  • Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 16:04:53 -0400 (EDT)
  • Cc: james@ca.newbridge.com, roy.spitzer@postman, ion@nexen.com

James,

Unfortunately, I accidently deleted your response.  I do not agree with it.

The Network Providers have implemented the signalling according to the
ITU Q.933 standard and FRF Implementation agreement 4.  It behooves us
not to create extra work on the network providers to take out a feature.
Common bidirectional QOS can be implemented with no changes to the current
RFC 1604 interface.  It offers no added value to change the interface.
If it is not used let it be.  Simply, it is not broke: don't try to fix it.

> 
> James,
> 
> I agree with the philosophy that the incorporation of fields are not necessary
> unless there is a proven need.  It is unforturemate that some of the suggested
> fields were placed in the network provider's code because it was deemed
> necessary for support of unbalanced traffic that the user could offer.  If
> it is not configuable by network management in the FR DTE, the feature
> cannot be offered.
> 
> Regards,
> Roy
> 
> 
> ==========================================================================
> 
> Roy Spitzer				Roy.Spitzer@adn.alcatel.com
> Alcatel Data Networks			(703) 724-2412
> 44983 Knoll Square			FAX: (703) 724-2005
> Ashburn, VA 20147
> 
>