NOTE: This charter is a snapshot of the 40th IETF Meeting in Washington, DC. It may now be out-of-date. Last Modified: 24-Oct-97
Hal Sandick <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Eric Crawley <email@example.com>
Routing Area Director(s):
Joel Halpern <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Routing Area Advisor:
Joel Halpern <email@example.com>
To Subscribe: firstname.lastname@example.org
Description of Working Group:
This working group is chartered to define a framework and techniques for Quality of Service (QoS) Routing in the Internet. QoS Routing allows the network to determine a path that supports the QoS needs of one or more flows in the network. The path chosen may not be the "traditional shortest path" that is typically computed based on current metrics and policies. The group's work will focus on how to select and maintain packet forwarding paths capable of meeting specific service class objectives. In particular, the techniques will specify what extensions and adaptations to routing and QoS setup protocols are required to support QoS routing and new packet handling techniques that may be needed to avoid packet loops for QoS flows. While it is not intended, this may also spawn the development of new routing protocols that can specifically address QoS routing. The WG will identify topics and issues in QOS routing which require additional research.
The WG needs to work closely with other routing protocol working groups such as OSPF, IDR, BGP, and IDMR. A close relationship with the RSVP, IntServ, and ISSLL working groups is also needed to understand the QoS signaling and specification.
Goals and Milestones:
Post internet-draft outlining the requirements, issues, history, and an initial framework for QoS routing in the Internet.
Refine the QOS Framework internet-draft with inputs from other working groups such as RSVP and some of the routing WGs.
Submit internet-draft to IESG for publication as an Informational RFC.
Revise charter or shut down.
· A Framework for QoS-based Routing in the Internet
No Request For Comments
Minutes of the Quality of Service Routing (QoSR) Working Group
Recorded by Hal Sandick and Eric Crawley.
Eric Crawley started the meeting off with a quick introduction and the agenda. The slides are available in:
Hal Sandick gave a quick update on the QoSR framework document (draft-ietf-qosr-framework-02.txt). The slides are available in:
Hal went through the last round of changes to the document. They were minor and included additional background information and editorial changes. The Framework is being sent out for last call ending on 1/12/98. As part of the last call, changes to the framework document may include additional information on of Type of Service (TOS) routing which has been used in the past. Last, the authors feel that it is too early to focus on QoS routing to support the Differential Services work going on in the Integrated Services work group.
The presentation went quickly and the comments that were made were requested to be replicated onto the mailing list.
Mark Pullen next gave a update on the QoSIP models from George Mason University. The slides are available in:
Several groups have already downloaded the models available at http://bacon.gmu.edu/qosip but there were some bugs in the initial version that made it difficult for others to run the models. A new version has been produced that should be much better. Mark's group plans to integrate a new OSPF model available from Optnet/Mil3 in January 1998. They plan to update the documentation and resubmit the previous Internet Drafts they produced from the simulation data. They would like to expand the model using updated Internet Drafts and optimize the performance a bit. The current simulation takes about a week of computation time on a Sparc 20 for an 84 node network.
Mark had a few graphs to show some results. One of the preliminary conclusions is that the demands placed on systems by additional Dijkstra calculations and LSA traffic are manageable. For more information, including Mark's graphs, see http://bacon.gmu.edu/qosip.
The session ended with call for a discussion about the work group's future. There were no comments made. It seems that the work group will go dormant after the Framework document is completed. The meeting ended after 20 minutes.
go to list