1 / 12

End-to-End Quality in IP networks: Can we offer and charge it?

End-to-End Quality in IP networks: Can we offer and charge it?. Marco Alfano marco.alfano@cselt.it. Magnus Krampell krampell@eurescom.de. Michael Smirnov smirnov@fokus.gmd.de. QoS Present Issues. Mechanisms exist for controlling performance in IP networks (e.g., DiffServ, IntServ)

nickan
Download Presentation

End-to-End Quality in IP networks: Can we offer and charge it?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. End-to-End Quality in IP networks:Can we offer and charge it? Marco Alfano marco.alfano@cselt.it Magnus Krampell krampell@eurescom.de Michael Smirnov smirnov@fokus.gmd.de WTC 2000

  2. QoS Present Issues • Mechanisms exist for controlling performance in IP networks (e.g., DiffServ, IntServ) • What about the end-to-end QoS? • What is the perception of the user? • How to express end-to-end QoS requirements? Quality Classes? • QoS cost/benefit ratio? • How to control/measure/charge QoS? • End-to-end QoS in a multiprovider environment? But customers do ask for end-to-end QoS! WTC 2000

  3. A possible solution • EURESCOM project QUASIMODO– QUAlity of ServIce MethODOlogies and solutions within the service framework: Measuring, Managing and Charging QoS • 10 Participants: -Telecom Italia/CSELT - Deutsche Telekom AG - British Telecom - Telia AB - Finnet Group - Broadcom - Telenor AS - Portugal Telecom - MATAV Hungarian Telecom - Hellenic Telecomm. Org. WTC 2000

  4. Single quality Single application Quality Classes Application Categories Premium Basic Non real time Real time QUASIMODO Basics • Provide different Quality Classes • Different applications have different performance requirements WTC 2000

  5. A D C User network User network B Provider(s) Network Characterised Characterised Provided QUASIMODO Scenario WTC 2000

  6. QUASIMODO model => QUASI-model • Quality Classes (QC) • Application Categories (AC) • Network Performance Levels (NPL) • NP parameters (delay, jitter, loss) • Bounds, guarantees WTC 2000

  7. Service Offer Specification • Quality Class: Basic or Premium • NPL (AC1), NPL (AC2), NPL (AC3) • Traffic profile • bandwidth, ... • Characterisation of user domain • CPU type, LAN speed, ... • Pricing information • The service offer can be part of a SLA WTC 2000

  8. Example of NPLs • Tested applications: • AC1: VoIP • AC2: A/V Streaming • AC3: Web E-commerce WTC 2000

  9. Service Offer (NPLs, …) Charge 7 3 Application Categories 6 4 1 5 2 QualityClass Actual Network Performance Offer and charge • We offer managed Quality Classes to the user/customer and charge for them WTC 2000

  10. NPL measurement based on Cisco SA Agent QoS control based on Diff-Serv LAN LAN LAN LAN Premium Premium Cisco Router Linux Router Cisco Router Basic Basic Traffic Generator QoS Measurement and Control WTC 2000

  11. QoS Charging • Charging based on: • Service Offer (promised NPL, traffic profile) • actual usage • provided NPL (QC/AC) • Charging algorithm based on a business model (being defined) • The network must be instrumented to provide the required information WTC 2000

  12. Conclusions • End-to-End Quality • QUASIMODO Project • Quality Classes in a Service Offer Further Information • http://www.eurescom.de/Public/Projects/p900-series/P906/P906.htm • Deliverable 1 to be published soon WTC 2000

More Related