Re: [LARTC] RE: Anything out there that is similar to Cisco's WFQ?

["John Bäckstrand" <sandos@home.se>]

> =?iso-8859-1?Q?John_Bäckstrand?= writes:
>  > > This is not very convincing.  Do you actually
know
>  > how WFQ
>  > > works?  If so, please tell us.  The doc you sent
did
>  > not describe how
>  > > it works but what the effects are, and those are
>  > entirely consistent
>  > > with what SFQ does.
>  > > High bandwidth flows are limited, low bandwidth
flows
>  > get lower
>  > > latency.  Can you describe some effect that's
>  > different?
>  >
>  > I read a bit on WFQ earlier, Im not grasping it
totally
>  > and I dont know every implementation detail, but I
>  > think its basically WRR but taking actual
bandwidth
>  > usage into account, and not just packet-counts.
Well,
>  > try this:
>  >
>  >
http://www.sics.se/~ianm/WFQ/wfq_descrip/node21.html
>
> This sounds just like SFQ except for the weights.
> I have a variant of SFQ that does support weights if
that's important.
> It's easy to add.  (The hard part is the code that
allows you to
> configure the weights.)

I was under the impression that the weights of WFQ isnt
actually supposed to be set manually, but rather
automatically. This page has a nice picture of WFQ (I
think)

http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/732/Tech/wfq/

It says: "Weight determined by:
*Required QoS (IP Procedure, RSVP)
*Flow throughput inversely proportional
*Frame relay FECN, BECN, DE (for FR Traffic)"

Only think I actually understood was "Flow throughput
inversely proportional" which is a property I am
looking for when trying to find a traffic control
implementation.

---
John Bäckstrand


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