[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Progressing MAR
- To: "Francois Le Faucheur (flefauch)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: RE: Progressing MAR
- From: "Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS" <email@example.com>
- Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 21:37:05 -0600
- Cc: "Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, "Lai, Wai S (Waisum), ALABS" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Jim Boyle" <email@example.com>, "Ed Kern (ejk)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> What am I missing?
We've been over such examples before. Let's not go over the same ground again, please refer to the earlier threads/responses for answers to your examples. Basically, as I've pointed out in the earlier threads, realistic voice/data traffic patterns and network engineering rules don't happen like that.
All BC models should be designed to operate under actual network conditions, traffic, and engineering. Let's focus on realistic examples, with realistic traffic patterns and engineering rules. For MAR, this is what is presented in the I-D, real examples based on real traffic and engineering design. I suggest you understand the examples in the I-D, and point out where these are `incorrect`. That would be a more worthwhile discussion I think.
MAR is based on *operational* models in use for many years, which of course must operate well under real traffic conditions and which are engineered/designed in the way SP's normally operate their networks. I think that's one thing you're missing.