Re: Options to consider [Re: tunneling [Was: Agenda for Vienna]]

[Olivier Bonaventure <Bonaventure@info.ucl.ac.be>]

Michael,
> >
> > I agree that different sites will have very different requirements, so i
> > think that within the short term solutions, multiple complementary (not
> > competing) mechanisms are needed, so that a site can choose which
> > mechanism to implement in order to satisfy their particular needs.
> 
> And for each solution there needs to be a good understanding of its 
> performance implications.  A viable mechanism over DSL might not be when 
> used over gigabit ethernet.

For NAROS, Cédric de Launois has evaluated its performance by simulating
the performance of the proposed protocol on a one-day trace of all the
IPv4 traffic of our University (about 8000 hosts in the site and 200
GBytes of traffic, i.e. 20 Mbps on average over the whole day). This
evaluation shows that the NAROS approach scales well. You can find more
details on this evaluation in the following submitted paper :

http://www.info.ucl.ac.be/people/delaunoi/paper/naros.pdf


Best regards,


Olivier Bonaventure

-- 
CSE Dept. UCL, Belgium - http://www.info.ucl.ac.be/people/OBO/