000000277 001__ 277
000000277 005__ 20180318102517.0
000000277 037__ $$aCONF
000000277 245__ $$aDelay Jitter Bounds and Packet Scale Rate Guarantee for Expedited Forwarding
000000277 269__ $$a2001
000000277 260__ $$c2001
000000277 336__ $$aConference Papers
000000277 520__ $$aWe consider the definition of the Expedited Forwarding Per-Hop Behaviour (EF PHB) as given in RFC 2598, and its impact on worst case end-to-end delay jitter. On one hand, the definition in RFC 2598 can be used to predict extremely low end-to-end delay jitter, independent of the network scale. On the other hand, we find that the worst case delay jitter can be made arbitrarily large, while each flow traverses at most a specified number of hops, if we allow networks to become arbitrarily large, this is in contradiction with the previous statement. We analyze where the contradiction originates, and find the explanation. It resides in the fact that the definition in RFC 2598 is not easily implementable in schedulers we know of, mainly because it is not formal enough, and also because it does not contain an error term. We propose a new definition for the EF PHB, called ``Packet Scale Rate Guarantee
000000277 6531_ $$aDifferentiated Services
000000277 6531_ $$aExpedited Forwarding
000000277 6531_ $$aNetwork Calculus
000000277 700__ $$aBennett, Jon C. R.
000000277 700__ $$aBenson, Kent
000000277 700__ $$aCharny, Anna
000000277 700__ $$aCourtney, William F.
000000277 700__ $$0241098$$aLe Boudec, Jean-Yves$$g105633
000000277 7112_ $$aInfocom 2001$$cAnchorage, USA
000000277 773__ $$tInfocom 2001
000000277 8564_ $$s144384$$uhttps://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/277/files/BennettBCCL01.pdf$$zn/a
000000277 909CO $$ooai:infoscience.tind.io:277$$pconf$$pIC
000000277 909C0 $$0252614$$pLCA$$xUS00024
000000277 909C0 $$0252453$$pLCA2$$xU10427
000000277 937__ $$aLCA-CONF-2001-002
000000277 970__ $$a433/LCA
000000277 973__ $$aEPFL$$sPUBLISHED
000000277 980__ $$aCONF