[38169] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Last Mile QoS WAS: RE: QOS or more bandwidthy
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rafi Sadowsky)
Tue May 29 16:19:11 2001
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 23:18:44 +0300 (IDT)
From: Rafi Sadowsky <rafi-nanog@meron.openu.ac.il>
Reply-To: <nanog@merit.edu>
To: Nathan Stratton <nathan@robotics.net>
Cc: Pete Kruckenberg <pete@kruckenberg.com>, <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.30.0105291523590.84713-100000@Andy.robotics.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.31.0105292316550.25650-100000@meron.openu.ac.il>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Tue, 29 May 2001, Nathan Stratton wrote:
>
> On Tue, 29 May 2001, Pete Kruckenberg wrote:
>
> > A 1536-byte frame has a fairly significant impact (~8ms) at
> > 1.5Mb/s. QoS appears to have diminishing return as you move
> > beyond 45Mbps, at least as far as multi-service networks go.
> > Maybe QoS isn't necessary or useful in the core if you have
> > line-speed switching and no congestion on an OC-X/DWDM
> > network.
>
> It has even a larger impact on a 128K frac T1 (~93ms). QoS is a big help,
> but at slower speeds you also need to deal with fragmentation and the
> layer 2 transport. I am surprised that there has been so little movement
> as far as QoS and efficiency in regards to VoIP. Take a standard voice call
> using G.726 at 32 kbps, you get 40 bytes of voice every 10 ms. Now add on
> your 20 byte IP header, 8 bytes UDP, and 12 byte RTP header. So now we are
> at 80 bytes and most of the time we are shoving this on ATM so our 32K
> voice stream now sucks 84.8 kbps.
>
> If you are interested in more info on QoS and Voice/Data over last mine
> networks check out my website:
>
> http://www.robotics.net/papers/integratedvoice.html
>
>
> ><>
> Nathan Stratton CTO, Exario Networks, Inc.
> nathan@robotics.net nathan@exario.net
> http://www.robotics.net http://www.exario.net
>
>
