This is definitely confusing and even Varghese (one of the DRR authors) uses
this analogy:
A banking analogy motivates the solution. Each flow is given a quantum,
which is like a periodic salary that gets credited to the flow’s bank
account on every round-robin cycle. As with most bank accounts, a flow
cannot spend (i.e., send packets of the corresponding size) more than is
contained in its account; the algorithm does not allow bank accounts to
be overdrawn. However, perfectly naturally, the balance remains in the
account for possible spending in the next period. Thus any possible
unfairness in a round is compensated for in subsequent rounds, leading
to long-term fairness.
Quote is from the book Network Algorithmics (p. 351) by George Varghese.
Perhaps the banking analogy would be less confusing?
Cheers,
/b
On 25 Jan 2016, at 9:52, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Agarwal, Anil" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Might be beneficial to fix the following line in section 5.4 -
>>
>> int deficit; /* this is the queue credit */
>
> Yeah, I'm aware of that. Couldn't decide what to do about the fact that
> the Linux code calls it 'deficit' instead of 'credit', so just punted on
> it and added that comment. Guess it's less confusing to just call the
> variable 'credit'. Thanks for confirming that it was definitely
> confusing ;)
>
> Fixed in the -04.
>
> -Toke
>
> _______________________________________________
> aqm mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
--
Björn Grönvall, [email protected], Cell +46 70 768 06 35, Jabber/XMPP:
[email protected]
“The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but
the silence over that by the good people.”
― Martin Luther King Jr.
_______________________________________________
aqm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
