Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

State of QoS peering in Nanog
From: Francois Menard <francois () menards ca>
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 16:00:30 -0400


The Canadian telecommunications regulator, the CRTC, has just launched a public notice with possible worldwide 
implications IMHO, Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2011-206:


I think this is the very first regulatory inquiry into IP to IP interconnection for PSTN local interconnection.

One of the postulates that I intend to defend, is that in the PSTN today, in addition to interconnecting for the 
purpose of exchanging voice calls, it is possible to LOCALLY (at the Local Interconnection Region, roughly a US LATA) 
interconnect with guaranteed QoS for ISDN video conferencing.

In other words, there is more to PSTN interconnection than the support of the G.711 CODEC.  Other CODECs are supported, 
such as H.320.

This brings me to a point. Why should we loose this important feature of the PSTN, support for multiple CODECs, as we 
carelessly bottom level IP-IP interconnection to G.711 only.

Video conferencing on the Internet, particularly at high resolution, is not a reality today to say the least, foregoing 
of guessing what the future will hold.

Why not consider HD audio ?


A) I want to capture all instances where this issue has been addressed worldwide.

B) I also want to understand what is going on, insofar as enabling guaranteed QoS peering across BGP-4 interconnections 
in the Nanog community.

C) I also want to understand whether there is inter-service-provider RSVP or other per-session QoS establishment 

I call upon the Nanog community to consider this proceeding as very important and contribute to this thread.

And I will try to provide a forum for discussing this outside of Nanog when required.



  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]