x
<<   <   Page 5 / 9   >   >>
wayland_smithy 12/4/2012 | 9:18:11 PM
re: No VOIP for Panama Lucifer scirbed :
F" or a space-fller topic like "No VoIP for Panama", this board is getting very contentious and cantankerous. I don't understand why there is such strongly held opinion on VoIP by Optical and IP guys"

-LR Editorial guys : you've already got a wireless, optical, storage site: I reckon there's a good case for a Voice site also ?
Packet Man 12/4/2012 | 9:18:10 PM
re: No VOIP for Panama whoever trys to do that will go bankrupt sooner than you can see the visible QoS public Internet......
There is no free lunch....


Why do you say that? I can see it being hard for all the ISPs of the world to come to an agreement on some sort of universal IP QoS plan, but certainly not impossible. The framework is in place. Its called Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP). There are 6 bits used thus 64 classes of service can be defined. The IETF has already created a framework called Per Hop Behavior (PHB). For example the PHB called EF or DSCP 46. Using that frame work the Tier 1 Backbone players could come up with some sort of universial Internet QoS plan. They could then push that plan out the the Tier 2 and Tier 3 Players.

Why do you think implementing IP QoS on the Internet would be a financial burden on the ISPs?

Me
Packet Man 12/4/2012 | 9:18:09 PM
re: No VOIP for Panama Either a troll or a joke, right?
Quick answer: ATM has End-to-end QoS (Service Classes, Traffic Contracts, Connection Admission Control...) while IP has DSCP (if you're lucky) with per-hop management of forwarding behavior.

No I wasn't joking. ATM has end-to-end QoS only at Layer 2. ATM does not provide QoS to the application layer, unless the application itself has been specifically written to work with ATM. 99% of the software being written is being written to work with IP not ATM. So you still need IP in there.

With that said, I am still not sure how one can say ATM is better than IP DSCP QoS? If IP DSCP QoS can gaurentee (which it does, you just have to set it up) end-to-end QoS (done on a per hop basis I agree), I've yet to see how ATM is better than IP QoS. I agree there might be additional network engineering required in IP QoS, to make it work right, but ATM is no walk in the park either.

I've worked on very large ATM networks, and was a pro-ATM tech head myself a couple of years ago. However since changing jobs and becoming very saturated with the new IP QoS thats available I am pretty much converted. I like ATM, I think part of my 'issue' is overlaying a packet-switched network onto a packet-switched network. I preferr the KISS (keep it simple stupid) rule and use IP/PPP.

I am still waiting for someone to give me a concrete example where ATM QoS provided a solution where the newer IP QoS tools could not.

Me
lucifer 12/4/2012 | 9:18:09 PM
re: No VOIP for Panama PacketMan asked

Can you elaborate on how the QoS is better in ATM? How is ATM QoS better than IP QoS? Please tell me.

Either a troll or a joke, right?

Quick answer: ATM has End-to-end QoS (Service Classes, Traffic Contracts, Connection Admission Control...) while IP has DSCP (if you're lucky) with per-hop management of forwarding behavior.



Lucifer
sgan201 12/4/2012 | 9:18:08 PM
re: No VOIP for Panama Hi Packet Man,
Please show us an example how to use IP DSCP QOS to setup end to end QOS???
If you have an ATM switch that is routing capable, you could always mapped IP DSCP to a particular ATM VCC and guaranteed end to end QOS for an IP application.
Packet Man 12/4/2012 | 9:18:07 PM
re: No VOIP for Panama Your comment:
Hi Packet Man,
If MPLS Traffic Engineering is really good, why Equant (one of the leading MPLS SP) choose not to implement that..


My comment:
I have never mentioned MPLS once in any of my posts. I know very little about it and thus offer no opinions. I just keep defending IP QoS from all these "ATM only, IP QoS no work" flag wavers. Please do not change the subject, although we I guess we have all ignored the true subject of this post.

Me
Packet Man 12/4/2012 | 9:18:07 PM
re: No VOIP for Panama Your comment:
Please show us an example how to use IP DSCP QOS to setup end to end QOS???

My comment:
I gave two examples already. Once in this article I gave an example of how I used DSCP to ensure packets containing voice got through the network that had WAN links running at 96%, with FTP taking the performance hit. We ran a 20 minute test with 6 phones calls up on a network with 768Kbps WAN links. Our DMS toll staff who provided the ears, gave two thumbs up. Also in a previous post a few weeks ago I actually posted some sample config from one of my routers doing IP DSCP QoS.

Your comment:
If you have an ATM switch that is routing capable, you could always mapped IP DSCP to a particular ATM VCC and guaranteed end to end QOS for an IP application.

My comment:
Cool! I didn't know you could do that. But you still need the IP QoS to interface with the applications! I guess what I should of been saying is that IP QoS is well rounded enough and mature enough now, that ATM is no longer needed. I'm sure ATM and IP QOS can solve the same problem, there are usually two ways to skin a cat. I just can't stand to hear someone state you got to have ATM QoS because IP QoS does not work, because frankly its not true. Maybe three or fours years ago, but certainly not today. ATM is dead.

So rather than keep challenging me to give more and more examples, how about once and for all if someone from the "pure ATM only" arena give me an example of where ATM QoS solved a problem that todays IP QoS could not.

Man, I'm starting to sound like a broken record.

Hey LR editiors: Has someone done this in a lab and produced a report? If so please post so either me or the ATMers can keep quiet.

Me
sgan201 12/4/2012 | 9:18:07 PM
re: No VOIP for Panama Hi Packet Man,
If MPLS Traffic Engineering is really good, why Equant (one of the leading MPLS SP) choose not to implement that..
http://www.telecommagazine.com...
sgan201 12/4/2012 | 9:18:06 PM
re: No VOIP for Panama http://www.cosinecom.com/newse...

Hi Skeptic,
Equant had bought some Cosine box which is a Virtual Router based IP VPN box. Perhaps, the truth about MPLS RFC 2547 VPN being scalable and suitable for large scale deployment is begining to come up..

"The truth will set you free"
sgan201 12/4/2012 | 9:18:06 PM
re: No VOIP for Panama Hi Skeptic,
One of the greatest hype/BS/illusion that MPLS is selling is that by doing TE with MPLS, IP do not have to be over-provisioned and drive the ISP into chapter 11. It seem a great irony to me that one of the greatest MPLS flag waver out there is actually admitting that MPLS TE is not worth the trouble. MPLS had failed in its original mission..
<<   <   Page 5 / 9   >   >>
HOME
Sign In
SEARCH
CLOSE
MORE
CLOSE