Solving Reordering Due to QoS Class Remarking Sample Clauses

Solving Reordering Due to QoS Class Remarking. ‌‌ As mentioned in the previous section, the reordering problem exists not only in the 3- tier SLA with automatic class upgrades but also in all SLAs that upgrade or downgrade packets from one service queue to another. Note that this phenomenon does not occur in some SLAs where packets are remarked to other service classes (versus queues) where packets are queued in the same original service class queue (example of such services are the DiffServ AFx classes, where packets are remarked from and to the same AFx class: e.g., AFx1 to AFx2). As shown in Figure 5, a source communicates with a destination via multiple routers/nodes via some network. Each router is assumed to include a queuing system, consisting of some implementation of logical or physical queues and a scheduler, which stores and implements a queuing method. Legacy queuing methods do not take care of the reordering problem and basically work as follows. iMac
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Solving Reordering Due to QoS Class Remarking

  • SPECIALIZED JOB CLASSES Where there is a particular specialized job class in which the pay rate is below the local market value assessment of that job class, the parties may use existing means under the collective agreement to adjust compensation for that job class.

  • Corresponding Class of Reference Tranches With respect to (i) the Class M-1 Notes, the Class M-1 Reference Tranche, (ii) the Class M-2 Notes, the Class M-2 Reference Tranche, (iii) the Class M-3A Notes, the Class M-3A Reference Tranche, (iv) the Class M-3B Notes, the Class M-3B Reference Tranche and (v) the Class B Notes, the Class B Reference Tranche.

  • Allocation of Subordinate Reduction Amount to the Reference Tranches On each Payment Date prior to the Termination Date, after allocation of the Senior Reduction Amount and the Tranche Write-down Amount or Tranche Write-up Amount, if any, for such Payment Date as described above, the Subordinate Reduction Amount will be allocated to reduce the Class Notional Amount of each Class of Reference Tranche in the following order of priority, in each case until its Class Notional Amount is reduced to zero:

  • SPECIAL REMARKS There are no adjustments in the fiscal year 2021-22 Cost Allocation Plan. SECTION IV: ACCEPTANCE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO BY Original signed by Xxx Xxxxxx Name Director of Finance Title 04-29-2021 Date XXXXX X. XXX CALIFORNIA STATE CONTROLLER BY Original signed by XXXXXXX XXXXX, Manager Local Government Policy Section Local Govt Programs & Services Division 04-30-2021 Date Negotiated by Xxxx Xxxx Telephone (000) 000-0000

  • Allocation of Senior Reduction Amount to the Reference Tranches On each Payment Date prior to the Termination Date, after allocation of the Tranche Write-down Amount or Tranche Write-up Amount, if any, for such Payment Date as described above, the Senior Reduction Amount will be allocated to reduce the Class Notional Amount of each Class of Reference Tranche in the following order of priority, in each case until its Class Notional Amount is reduced to zero:

  • Provider Selection To the extent applicable to Provider in performance of the Agreement, Provider shall comply with 42 CFR 438.214, as may be amended from time to time, which includes, but is not limited to the selection and retention of providers, credentialing and recredentialing requirements and nondiscrimination. If Subcontractor and/or Health Plan delegate credentialing to Provider, Subcontractor and/or Health Plan will provide monitoring and oversight and Provider shall ensure that all licensed medical professionals are credentialed in accordance with Health Plan’s and the State Contract’s credentialing requirements.

  • Maximum Class Size A. By September 7 of each year, no regular classroom teacher in an elementary school shall be assigned more than the number of students for each grade listed except as provided in 22-2-B and 22-8 below. K = 26 1-3 = 29 4-6 = 30 Combination = 27 Multi-Age Classes = 27

  • Concluding Remarks This chapter explored whether multiple concepts related to slot coordination offer scope for finding solutions for the specific issues experienced at super-congested airports relating to this dissertation’s research questions, primarily in the field of reflecting the public value associated with slots in coordination decisions and safeguarding airport access for the purposes of a competitive air transport market safeguarded by EU Regulation 1008/2008. The concepts discussed include the debate on who holds the legal title to a slot, the functionally and financially independent coordinator, the application of the new entrant rule, the implementation of a secondary market for slots and the relationship between the allocation of slots and competition law. In my view, slots are allocated to airlines as entitlements to use available infrastructure, subject to conditions such as utilization thresholds or allocation criteria. Indeed, they represent relevant operational, economic, legal and social interests and functions.1342 Inter alia, according to the Commission, slots are “critical inputs” for any entrant wishing to operate or expand services.1343 Although airlines, airports and governments alike have claimed they should be regarded as the legal owners of slots,1344 they cannot, in my view, be identified as property rights. At super-congested airports in particular, slots are valuable concepts to society at large as they safeguard public functions such as connectivity and airport access, as discussed in Chapter 2, sections 2.3 and 2.4. Accordingly, Chapter 6 recommends that the coordinator should ensure that scarce slots are declared, allocated and used in a way that is reflective of these public functions. Solving the debate on slot ownership by clarifying that slots are essentially public goods could contribute to making this recommendation work. Furthermore, a future slot regime should be cognizant of the shifted role of the coordinator from performing merely technical functions to that of a policymaker, so to say. At super-congested airports, slot allocation ultimately comes down to making decisions which airlines can and cannot operate to and from an airport.1345 With slot scarcity levels and the risk of judicial reviews of allocation decisions rising, coordinators play an increasingly important role in the correct application of the slot allocation rules. After all, airlines are all in the same ‘game’ for the last available slot pair and the coordinator continuously has to make trade-offs between competing slot requests. Though the coordinator has been delegated public functions, by no means was the slot coordinator intended to perform the task of policy making. Arguably, the coordinator has been handed a role it was never intended to perform.1346 In a constrained environment where the overall number of slots is largely fixed and there is no outlook for capacity increases, the possibilities for airlines to start or expand services requires incumbent airlines to exit or downscale their services at a particular airport.1347 Given the high value of slots at super-congested airports, it is unlikely that airlines will simply hand back the slots they hold to the coordinator, even in times of economic downturn. Instead, they may capitalize the slots they hold to pay off creditors in case of a bankruptcy or insolvency, or they may engage in slot transfers or lease agreements, as discussed in sections 5.3 and 5.6 above. Hence, airport access becomes foreclosed in its entirety to airlines wanting to expand or 1342 See European Commission, supra note 54, paragraph 11. 1343 See Case M.3770 – Lufthansa/Swiss, supra note 274, paragraph 27. 1344 See Abeyratne, supra note 55, at 36; Xxxx XxxXxxxxx, supra note 63, at 2-2. 1345 See ICAO, supra note 256. 1346 See Xxxxxx et al., supra note 18, at 9. 1347 See Xxxx XxxXxxxxx(II), supra note 113, at 111. start operations at super-congested airports with no slots freely available, or at peak times at other congested airports.

  • Average Log Length and Payment Reduction If the average log length for all logs delivered under this contract is less than the average log length specified in the table in clause G-024.2, The amount of allowable payment reduction shall be calculated by multiplying the payment rate in P-028.2 by the total volume delivered, and the difference between the average length of logs delivered and the average log length specified in G-024.2, times 1% as follows: Log Length Payment Reduction = (B x V x L) x (.01) 1/10th) Where: B = Bid rate from P-028.2 clause V = total delivered log Volume L = Length in feet below specified average (rounded to nearest Average log length payment reductions calculated by the Purchaser must be approved by the State, prior to payment for the final billing period. Third-party scaling organization information is required to determine Xxxxxxxx mbf and Average log length for payment reduction purposes. Average log length is determined on a piece count basis. Value of log length price reduction will be derived from the applicable sort value as described in this contract. Scale information for determining Average log length for payment reduction eligibility must be obtained from roll-out scale. Truck-ramp, sample scaling, and/or bundle scaling information is not acceptable for determining eligibility. Purchaser’s exclusive remedy for below average log lengths shall be the payment reduction described in this clause, notwithstanding other provisions in the Uniform Commercial Code.

  • SUBMISSION OF THE MONTHLY MI REPORT 4.1 The completed MI Report shall be completed electronically and returned to the Authority by uploading the electronic MI Report computer file to MISO in accordance with the instructions provided in MISO.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.