[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [Ecrit] Performance Requirement
Would you want to characterize the tail using values for:
1-sigma (68%), 2s
2-sigma (95%), 4s
3-sigma (99%), 8s
And only leave some small fraction of infinitely long call setups?
Mike
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ecrit-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:ecrit-bounces at ietf.org]
> On Behalf Of Brian Rosen
> Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 11:23 AM
> To: 'Drage, Keith (Keith)'; 'ECRIT'
> Subject: RE: [Ecrit] Performance Requirement
>
> Fair enough: 90%
>
> Brian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ecrit-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:ecrit-bounces at ietf.org]
> On Behalf Of Drage, Keith (Keith)
> Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 11:05 AM
> To: 'ECRIT'
> Subject: RE: [Ecrit] Performance Requirement
>
> Without wishing to get into the discussion of whether we
> should have a specific value at all, I would note that the
> specification of a specific value, without qualification of
> percentage of calls that should meet this value, is utterly
> meaningless.
>
> regards
>
> Keith
>
> Keith Drage
> Lucent Technologies
> drage at lucent.com
> tel: +44 1793 776249
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ecrit-bounces at ietf.org
> > [mailto:ecrit-bounces at ietf.org]On Behalf Of Andrew Newton
> > Sent: 02 August 2005 13:44
> > To: Brian Rosen
> > Cc: 'ECRIT'
> > Subject: Re: [Ecrit] Performance Requirement
> >
> >
> >
> > On Aug 2, 2005, at 8:18 AM, Brian Rosen wrote:
> >
> > > Rohan suggested we remove the D5 requirement and replace
> it with a
> > > motivational section, since there was no requirement. I
> think we
> > > should have a concrete goal, with a motivation for how we
> came to
> > > the goal. I propose:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The time required to map SHOULD be 500ms, assuming normal
> caching
> > > strategies in the mechanism work. The maximum time SHOULD be 1
> > > second.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Motivation: Total time from last digit pressed to ring at
> the PSAP
> > > should be two seconds. Allocating one quarter of that to the
> > > mapping mechanism seems reasonable, and achievable if caching
> > > mechanisms work well enough for a single element to
> determine the
> > > mapping.
> > I believe that if we continue applying 2119 language, then
> > specifying
> > it as a gaol or a requirement has no difference. Also, the
> > mechanism
> > specifies caching. Given we don't know what the requirements
> > are for
> > caching, we should avoid this language.
> >
> > -andy
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ecrit mailing list
> > Ecrit at ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ecrit mailing list
> Ecrit at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ecrit mailing list
> Ecrit at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
>
_______________________________________________
Ecrit mailing list
Ecrit at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit