Overview of VoIP Interoperability Interprovider

QoS Aspects from FCC NRIC VI FG3 Final

Report, December 2003
http://www.nric.org/fg/charter_vi/fg3/NRIC6FG3FinalReport.pdf

Presented by Dave McDysan

dave.mcdysan@mci.com

10/27/2004 1
 Public
Telecommunication
Services PSTN Internet Network
Interconnection
Carrier Carrier ISP ISP
A B A B

Carrier ISP
C C

Access
Networks

Wireless/ Wireline Wireline Wireless/

Satellite DSL Packet Cable Satellite
Circuit
Circuit Packet

Users

Voice Data Voice Voice Data VoIP Data VoIP Data VoIP Data VoIP
Broadband
10/27/2004 Access
2
 Quality of Service
(as defined by NRIC VI FG3 Section 3.4.1)

• Metrics
– Quantitative measures of quality
• Voice Quality

• Quantities: IP transfer delay, loss ratio, delay variation

– ITU-T Y.1540, IETF IPPM
• Reference configurations & numerical objectives
– ITU-T Y.1541
• Mapping of packet performance to speech quality
• Mechanisms
– Specific methods to achieve QoS (metrics)
• Signaling based admission control
• Intra-provider QoS
– IETF RSVP signaling, DOCSIS, etc.
• Inter-provider QoS
– Provision sufficient capacity to meet metrics
– IETF Diffserv packet (re)marking, policing, PHBs, and PDBs

10/27/2004 3
 Table I.1/G.1010 – Performance targets for audio and video applications

Application Degree of Typical Key performance parameters and target values

symmetry data rates
Mediu
m
One-way Delay Informatio Other
delay variation n loss (Note
2)
Audio Conversationa Two-way 4-64 kbit/s <150 ms < 1 ms < 3% packet
l voice preferred loss ratio
(Note 1) (PLR)
<400 ms
limit (Note
1)
Audio Voice Primarily 4-32 kbit/s < 1 s for < 1 ms < 3% PLR
messaging one-way playback
< 2 s for
record
Audio High quality Primarily 16-128 < 10 s << 1 ms < 1% PLR
streaming one-way kbit/s
audio (Note 3)
Video Videophone Two-way 16-384 < 150 ms < 1% PLR Lip-
kbit/s preferred synch:
(Note 4) < 80 ms
<400 ms
limit
Video One-way One-way 16-384 < 10 s < 1% PLR
kbit/s

NOTE 1 – Assumes adequate echo control.

NOTE 2 – Exact values depend on specific codec, but assumes use of a packet loss concealment algorithm to minimise
effect of packet loss.
NOTE 3 – Quality is very dependent on codec type and bit-rate.
10/27/2004 NOTE 4 – These values are to be considered as long-term target values which may not be met by current technology. 4
 End-to-end Metrics
Table 1/Y.1541 – Provisional IP network QoS class definitions and
network performance objectives
Network QoS Classes
Nature of network
performance Class 5
performance objective Class 0 Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4
parameter Unspecified
IPTD Upper bound on the 100 ms 400 ms 100 ms 400 ms 1s U
mean IPTD (Note 1)
IPDV Upper bound on the 1 − 50 ms 50 ms U U U U
10–3 quantile of IPTD (Note 3) (Note 3)
minus the minimum
IPTD (Note 2)
IPLR Upper bound on the 1 × 10–3 1 × 10–3 1 × 10–3 1 × 10–3 1 × 10–3 U
packet loss probability (Note 4) (Note 4)
IPER Upper bound 1 × 10–4 (Note 5) U

Table VI.1/Y.1541 – Possible association of Y.1541 QoS classes with differentiated services

IP transfer service IP QoS class Remarks

Best Effort PDB
PDBs based on Assured Forwarding
PDBs based on Expedited Forwarding
Unspecified QoS class 5
QoS classes 2, 3, 4
QoS classes 0 and 1
A legacy IP service, when operated on a lightly loaded
network may achieve a good level of IP QoS
The IPLR objective only applies to the IP packets in the
higher priority levels of each AF class.
The IPTD applies to all packets

http://www.itu.int/rec/recommendation.asp?type=products&lang=e&parent=T-REC-Y
10/27/2004 5
 Hypothetical Reference Path
IP network cloud

UNI UNI
TE AG IG IG AG TE

LAN LAN

Non-IP net Network section Network section Non-IP net

Customer installation End-to-end network (Bearer QoS) Customer installation

User-to-user connection (Teleservice QoS)

TE Terminal Equipment IG Internetwork GW

UNI
AG Access GW Y.1541
User Network Interface F05

Figure III.3/Y.1541 – Hypothetical reference path for QoS class 0

10/27/2004 6
 Summary of Standards Gaps

• Metrics
– Use standard measurement (e.g., RTCP XR RFC
3611) and data interchange formats
– 3GPP QoS standards not compatible with Y.1541
• Mechanisms
– Best practices for DDoS attacks identification &
mitigation
– Best practice for DSCP remarking
– Standardize Diffserv PHD and PDB at inter-
domain boundaries
– Industry experience on meeting QoS metrics

10/27/2004 7