On Sat, 2013-10-12 at 08:11 +0200, Michael Welzl wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I'll begin by apologizing for asking what I'm quite sure is a terribly
> stupid question to many of you.
> 
> The question is:
> 
> It has long been known that media data can have different levels of
> importance. Simply put, if packet #1 from a single source contains
> parts of a video's I-Frame and packet #2 contains only parts of
> B-Frames, and both end up in the same queue, controlled by an AQM (for
> instance), it would be better for the video stream if packet #2 would
> be dropped rather than packet #1.
> 
> There is nothing new with this story; it's not hard to find research
> papers that document various variations of this theme, showing
> benefits in video quality.
> 
> My question is, why is none of this happening?
> 
> Is it because DSCP values are typically associated with sources, and
> hence, marking packet #2 as "less" important would put the source at
> the risk of having its packets less important than not only its own
> other packets, but anybody else's?  But there is equipment that does
> per-connection stuff, and such things could probably better be done
> near the edges, where the bottleneck typically is... so if that's the
> whole issue, we could define DSCP values that mean relative importance
> *within the same five-tuple only*. Surely that has been thought about
> and probably proposed by folks before, so what happened? Why isn't it
> done?
> 
> Or is it because per-five-tuple-functionality in the network is
> regarded as being too costly, and not encouraged, and hence not
> standardized?
> 
> I'm just trying to understand the reasons for this particular
> long-standing difference between research an reality.

The Assured Forwarding (AF) PHB group (RFC2597) was defined precisely to
enable this drop-precedence-without-reordering-packets-within-a-flow
behavior.  In Diffserv jargon (RFC3260), an instance of an AF behavior
aggregate (BA), e.g., AF11/AF12/AF13, would be an ordered aggregate
(OA).  Packets in a flow DSCP-encoded with either AF11/AF12/AF13 (for
example) are guaranteed to be transmitted in the order received, but
will have different drop precedences (AF11 highest; AF13 lowest).  This
is usually achieved by serving all packets on a port with the AF1* DSCP
via the same FIFO queue.


Regards,

// Steve

Reply via email to