 |
 |
I think that SFN is responsible to ensure congestion-free capacity all the way back to the core switch. MN VoIP is separately responsible for ensuring congestion-free capacity from its remote to the core, but in the worst case scenario where MN VoIP failed to upgrade its links, I would argue that SFN still has a separate obligation to remedy the congestion to their switch, by switching to direct links if necessary. This is all hopefully theoretical, of course. This proposal has MN VoIP's cooperation and re-affirmed commitment to upgrade as needed. -- Richard