Björn Grönvall <[email protected]> writes: > 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?
Yeah, that's why I switched to using 'credit' as the term for what is being kept track of in the next revision: https://kau.toke.dk/ietf/draft-ietf-aqm-fq-codel-04.html Can't really change the fact that the algorithm is called 'deficit round-robin', though, so can't get rid of the 'deficit' term entirely. -Toke _______________________________________________ aqm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
