RE: Progressing MAR

[Dimitry Haskin <dhaskin@axiowave.com>]

To my understanding all currently specified BC models (RD, MAM, MAR) can be
currently only considered for Experimental or Informational status at most.

Just to make sure that we are on the same page...

Dimitry

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS [mailto:gash@att.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 10:08 AM
> To: te-wg@ops.ietf.org
> Cc: Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS; Lai, Wai S (Waisum), ALABS; Francois
> Le Faucheur (flefauch); Jim Boyle; Ed Kern (ejk)
> Subject: Progressing MAR
> 
> 
> All,
> 
> A specification for the Maximum Allocation with Reservation 
> (MAR) bandwidth constraint (BC) model is proposed in 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ash-mpls-dste-bcmodel-max-alloc-re
sv-01.txt.  

MAR is an extension of the Maximum Allocation Model (MAM).  MAR is similar
to  MAM in that a maximum bandwidth allocation is given to each class type
(CT).  However, through the use of bandwidth reservation and protection
mechanisms, CTs are allowed to exceed their bandwidth allocations under
conditions of no congestion but revert to their allocated bandwidths when
overload and congestion occurs.  

Analysis is presented in an ANNEX which shows that the MAR model meets all
the objectives for BC models, and that it simultaneously achieves bandwidth
efficiency, bandwidth isolation, and protection against QoS degradation
without preemption.  The analysis information provides critical guidance to
users' implementation of the BC models and some important guidelines which
users should be aware of before choosing a BC model for their network.

I would like to get a sense of the list for using this I-D as the basis for
the MAR specification and for accepting this as a WG document.  

Comments are welcome.

Thanks,
Jerry