RE: Issue-5: RE: Dropping the Local Overbooking Multiplier (LOM) meth od from D S-TE specs?

["Choudhury, Sanjaya" <Sanjaya.Choudhury@marconi.com>]

Hi Dimitry!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dimitry Haskin [mailto:dhaskin@axiowave.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 11:13 AM
> To: 'Choudhury, Sanjaya'; te-wg@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Issue-5: RE: Dropping the Local Overbooking Multiplier
> (LOM) meth od from D S-TE specs?
> 
<snip..>
> > 
> > 	2. For a moment let is assume that preemption *is* 
> > 	deployed in the domain. Can you explain me how I 
> > 	will achieve the following [please be specific in
> > 	what the user will need to do and the BC model in 
> > 	use]:
> > 
> > 		case-1: want to overbook data-traffic without
> > 		overbooking voice traffic.
> > 
> > 		case-2: Want to overbook the voice traffic by
> > 		10%, but want to overbook data traffic by 40%
> > 
> > 		case-3: want to overbook gold-traffic by 10%,
> > 		overbook silver-traffic by 15%, overbook 
> > 		normal-traffic by 20%
> 
> What is the catch? Why would not you do just that? I.e., 
> overbook each CT
> independently to their respective designated level. 

  I am still trying to understand _how_ (you propose to
  overbook each CT independently)? DSTE-PROTO proposes
  3 approaches: 
	(i) LSP Size overbooking i.e user specifies a 
	higher/lower bw requirement for the LSP during 
	creation)
	(ii) Link Size overbooking (user modifies the 
	max_reservable_bw)
	(iii) LOM
  Which of these above three approaches, should the 
  administrator use (obviously you are not indicating
  (iii) ?

  Or are you proposing to manipulate the BCs (for 
  individual CTs)???

> Or, I supposed, you have missed the aggregate constraint from 
> you examples
> which would make them slightly more illustrative. Not that I 
> want to help
> you to make your case ;)

  Your help will be appreciated.

  Thanks,
  sanjay

>
<snip..>
>