Subject: mbone and RSVP?

From: Lawrence Grigg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 11:43:31 +0000

Do any of the current mbone tools provide support for RSVP?

Lawrence Grigg

---

From: Jon Crowcroft <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 12:00:52 +0000

>Do any of the current mbone tools provide support for RSVP?
 
Lawrence 

not that i know of, excxept by running them in a wrapper and using
RTAP....

but we're working on this....i guess about 2 months off......
maybe ISI are too...

 jon

---

From: Dino Farinacci <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 07:27:47 -0800

>> Do any of the current mbone tools provide support for RSVP?

    I don't know if you consider a router a tool, but 11.2(1) on ciscos
    support RSVP.

Dino

---

From: "Prof. Henning Schulzrinne" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 10:42:26 -0500

> but we're working on this....i guess about 2 months off......

This is not quite true. Some tools (at least the video tool NeViT)
support RSVP "native" (and have for a few months). See
http://www.fokus.gmd.de/step/mint

They haven't been advertised widely since they require a bit more effort
to install and aren't quite release quality yet, but RSVP has been
tested...

Henning

---

From: Jon Crowcroft <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 16:30:54 +0000

>As far as I know about RSVP, this protocol only supports the _signalling_
 >of resource requirements and the _signalling_ of the distributed
 >reservation procedure. 
 
 >My questions are:

 >	Which routers (vendors, OS versions) do the actual reservation? 

cisco, bay, most the usual ones

 >	How is the call admittance decision done?
depends - see appropriate integrated service class - the admission
test is specified there...

 >	Is policing done and how?
typically FQ plus drop policy - again depends on int-serv, plus
utilisation, 
 
 >and:	Where can I find more inforamation about RSVP implementations?
 
i guess ask on rsvp list :      [email-masked]

 jon

---

From: [email-masked] (Jan-Peter Richter)
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 17:10:57 +0100 (MET)

>     I don't know if you consider a router a tool, but 11.2(1) on ciscos

I'm quite shure if this is the right place to ask, but...

My questions are:

Jan-Peter

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan-Peter Richter				Vogt-Koelln-Str.30
Universitaet Hamburg				D-22527 Hamburg
Fachbereich Informatik		       		Tel: +49 40 5494-2344 
Arbeitsgruppe Telekommunikation        		Fax: +49 40 5494-2328 
und Rechnernetze

e-mail:	[email-masked]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Dino Farinacci <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 08:53:45 -0800

>> 	Which routers (vendors, OS versions) do the actual reservation? 

    Here are the ones I know of:
	
	cisco
        Bay
	Precept
	Intel
	Sun
        SGI
        ISI public domain

    If there are any others, I'm sure people will denote the info.

>> and:	Where can I find more inforamation about RSVP implementations?

    You can send email to [email-masked]. I don't think there is a web page
    for the IETF RSVP working group.

Dino

---

From: Dino Farinacci <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 07:27:47 -0800

Dino

---

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 12:57:40 -0800

> and:    Where can I find more inforamation about RSVP implementations?

You must have gotten your information from the same numbskull that told
this to Network World. There is a completely braindead article there
that indicates that the fact of RSVP signalling can somehow be
operationally separated from what is being signalled, that there is no
standard for what is being signalled, and that RSVP basically does
nothing whatsoever except in a proprietary manner.

All of which is nonsense. The Integrated Services Working Group defines
that part, it is just as standard as RSVP (ie, it is an internet draft,
but is about to get sent in, and all RSVP implementations implement it),
and it does all of the above.

Call admittance is done by checking whether enough reservable queue and
bandwidth remains unreserved to meet the guarantee being made. If there
is, the answer is "yes", and it is otherwise "no". 

Policing was a big debate; some feel that once the token bucket is
exhausted, the traffic should be dropped; others feel it should be
treated as best effort (which may result in drops but is not required
to). Cisco does the latter.

Cisco 11.2 supports RSVP, and other router vendors have indicated that
they will support it in the future. Sun and SGI have ported the ISI code
to their operating systems and have beta deployment of the product.
Precept and Intel have PC stack implementations announced.