RE: [MIP-QOS] Re: MIP-QOS -- Scope of discussions

["ext Michael Thomas" <mat@cisco.com>]

marc.greis@nokia.com writes:
 > James,
 > > I agree
 > > with this requirement. I think radio networks have fundamental
 > > Intsrv like characteristics, I think any new QoS mechanism needs to
 > > provide the ability to do a smooth translation between wired QoS
 > > and wireless QoS. 
 > 
 > What exactly do you mean by that? Can you perhaps give some kind of 
 > example?

   James forgot the "Cellular" in "radio networks" above. 802.11
   could easily be treated as a diffserv network and adequately
   serve many many applications. Like my house.

   And therein lies the danger -- and ultimate futility -- of
   trying to claim that L2 X is really, really different. It's
   not. The sum of its parts may be different, but the base
   level characteristics are found in many other media. That's
   not to say that that sum won't pose some problems on existing
   QoS mechanisms, but we need to be careful that we not get
   suckered into trying to fix a problem that at its base is
   caused by an L2 that isn't IP friendly. I suspect that the
   outcome of all of this will be a combination of fixes for
   both in the long run.

	       Mike