Re: [LARTC] Re: further CBQ/tc documentation ds9a.nl/lartc/manpages

From: "Jim Fleming" <jfleming@anet.com>
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [LARTC] Re: further CBQ/tc documentation ds9a.nl/lartc/manpages
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:51:33 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-lartc-100799589310120@msgid-missing> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <marc-lartc-100785524509147@msgid-missing>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gerry Creager N5JXS" <gerry@cs.tamu.edu>
To: "bert hubert" <ahu@ds9a.nl>
Cc: "Henrik Nordstrom" <hno@marasystems.com>; "Martin Devera" <devik@cdi.cz>; "jamal" <hadi@cyberus.ca>; <lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl>
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 7:56 AM
Subject: Re: [LARTC] Re: further CBQ/tc documentation ds9a.nl/lartc/manpages

> bert hubert wrote:
> > 
> > On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 10:59:38AM +0100, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
> > 
> > > TCP is generally too smart to be delayed proper by "randomly" dropped packets
> > > without any signs in RTT. Especially when the RTT is small.
> > 
> > Richard Stevens disagrees with you.
> > 
> > > And such a administrative boundary is the one I am playing on. The boundary
> > > between a small customer and his ISP. The ISP obviously have the luxury of
> > > egress, but the customer does not on traffic received by him.
> > >
> > > Exacly how would this need vanish?
> > 
> > You can turn ingress into egress by inserting another machine of course.
> > Ingress shaping, well, is weird if you have no concept of an 'ingress
> > queue'.
> 
> Once you start working with tagging for DiffServ, you find that an
> ingress queue is a valuable idea.  From our perspective here it is a
> differentiator in looking at some of the "big iron" from the likes of
> Juniper, Anritsu, Marconi, Cisco and Alcatel.
> 
> Specifically, we're looking at priority queueing for management of
> various services:  VoIP, streaming video (unicast and multicast), H.323,
> etc.  Ingress queueing provides us an opportunity to tag and shape
> coming into the router rather than simply shaping on egress.  Our campus
> requires (geographic considerations) 7 internal routers before we come
> to the edge.  We have to shape on ingress at the first one, then
> maintain the marking and policies throughout the network.
> --
> Gerry Creager -- gerry@cs.tamu.edu
> Network Engineering
> Academy for Advanced Telecommunications and Learning Technologies 
> Texas A&M University 979.458.4020  (Phone) -- 979.847.8578  (Fax)
> 

"We have to shape on ingress at the first one, then
maintain the marking and policies throughout the network."

It sounds like you need RIFRAF Routing.
RIFRAF - Remote Identification Field Random Action Filter

Jim Fleming
http://www.IPv8.info
IPv16....One Better !!

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/lartc/