[e2e] Re: crippled Internet
cannara at attglobal.net
Thu Apr 26 21:01:28 PDT 2001
Craig, I believe these were perhaps updates to what you saw then, but I don't
have the reference for the graphs I have. They do indicate one way. I'll
look around more and may come up with the reference.
Craig Partridge wrote:
> In message <3AE7AEF4.411F83C9 at attglobal.net>, Cannara writes:
> >Randy, the ITU specs are in 6 categories, from "perfect" to "bad". Packet
> >delays of under 200mS are rated "acceptable", higher are not. Jitter
> >acceptance really depends on buffering at the ends as well as the delay. So
> >with 100mS delay you can get away with more jitter than with longer delays.
> Can you give us the citation for the ITU specs you're citing here? Years
> ago when I looked at the literature, the standard was CCITT G.114 which
> had standards for *one-way* delay and a three rating standard (acceptable,
> may impact some applications, unnacceptable). The one way delay values
> were up to 150ms (acceptable), 150 to 400 ms (may impact), above 400ms
> These were standards for voice and again, were one way.
More information about the end2end-interest