Excellent, thanks: I had forgotten the &@%^#$##!$!!!!! pass-through switch that we had a few years ago, that didn't have enough buffer and threw a jam signal whenever it got busy.
--dave On 01/17/2014 07:44 PM, Joe Touch wrote: > > > On 1/17/2014 3:51 PM, David Collier-Brown wrote: >> I'm going to suggest that these are queues and associated physical >> buffers that do two things: >> >> 1. hold packets that arrive at a bottleneck for a long as it takes to >> send them out a slower link that they came in on, and >> 2. hold bursts of packets that arrive adjacent to each other until they >> can be sent out in a normal spacing, with some small amount of time >> between them > > That's one thing: > > hold packets that have already arrived until they can depart > > If you're talking about rate changes, then the queue might absorb a > burst of packets then emit them, i.e., you need a queue that can > handle several packets. > > If you're taking about scheduling, then a queue might need as little > as one packet to adjust the outgoing time based on the incoming time. > > However, they're both queues, and they both absorb "bursts" (in the > latter case, it's a 'burst' of 1 that needs to wait until a scheduled > slot is available). > > Joe > _______________________________________________ > aqm mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm > -- David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the rest [email protected] | -- Mark Twain (416) 223-8968 _______________________________________________ aqm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
