Simple Differential Services: IP TOS and Precedence, Delay Indication, and Drop Preference
draft-ferguson-delay-drop-02
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Paul Ferguson | ||
| Last updated | 1998-03-12 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
Recent opinions and sentiments expressed in the Internet Service Provider (ISP) community, as well as the Internet community at-large, have voiced concern over the applicability and scalability of RSVP and the Integrated Service model in the global Internet infrastructure. Convincing arguments have been made for a differential services model which offers packet delivery services better than traditional best effort, especially in the face of congestion, yet not as resource intensive as RSVP. As a result, the Differentiated Service (diffserv) working group in the IETF has been examining methods to provide simpler, less resource intensive methods of offering differentiated services. This draft provides a practical method to use bit values expressed in the IP Type or Service (TOS) and IP precedence subfields of the TOS byte in the IP packet header for delay indication and packet drop preference, respectively.
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)