Re: [ANCP] Multicast BW Admission Control

[Francois Le Faucheur IMAP <flefauch at cisco.com>]

Hi Sven,

Thanks for the clarification.
The approach you describe below seems fine to me.
I think the key point it brings is to clarify that it it can make  
sense to perform CAC on some flows and not on others (and the non- 
CACed flows will not break the CACed flows).

One small point. When you say "the NAS must make sure that the  
multicast content is marked as best-effort", I wasn't sure if you  
implied that the NAS would remark the flow. While that may be an  
option, a more common case if probably that the flow got marked best- 
effort somewhere upstream (eg when flow enters the SP network). I  
think it would be worth clarifying.

Also, I would suggest that the text uses "Internet/Unkown" channels  
just as an example of where this sort of approach may be used, but  
make it clear it is a generic capability (e.g. the best-effort  
approach can be used on known flows also).

Cheers

Francois

On 8 Jan 2008, at 16:02, OOGHE Sven wrote:

> Hi,
>
> In the Vancouver meeting minutes there is mention about multicast
> bandwidth admission control, and what to do with "best effort"  
> streams.
> Apparently there is some confusion on the concept. This email is the
> clarify my view on this.
>
> As already described in section 3.4.2, there is a need - next to  
> policy
> based admission control - to perform CAC for the video content being
> streamed across the access network. The different options to do so are
> already defined in the framework document.
>
> Now, the point I wanted to bring up is that in general, the Access  
> Node
> and NAS cannot be aware of all possible multicast groups. It is likely
> that there may be multicast channels offered across the Internet. For
> these streams, performing bandwidth admission control may be
> challenging.
>
> To solve this, these requests should by default be accepted, but the
> network should handle the traffic as best effort. This can be done by
> first of all adding a "catch-all statement" in the Access Node white
> list or grey list. In case the Access Node queries the NAS, the NAS on
> his turn will have to accept the request. That way, the unknown  
> streams
> are not blocked by default. Next, the NAS must make sure that the
> multicast content coming from the Internet is marked as best effort
> traffic. This way, whenever congestion occurs somewhere in the
> access/aggregation network, this stream will be kicked out before the
> access provider's own premium content.
>
> If people agree with this, I suggest to add the above discussion to  
> the
> framework document.
>
> Regards,
> Sven
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ANCP mailing list
> ANCP at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ancp



_______________________________________________
ANCP mailing list
ANCP at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ancp