On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 12:24:28PM -0700, Ketan Kulkarni wrote: >> For Cat3k switches, I can assure you there's no bufferbloat -- they are >> badly underbuffered. > Generically does that mean bufferbloat is the problem predominantly seen > for the cable industry?
No. There are tons of other devices that have much larger buffers. Take DSLAMs, for instance. Or higher-end routers. > Cat3k was just an example. There are series of numerous other routers by > many vendors. But Cat3k isn't a router; it's an L3 switch. The difference is somewhat arbitrary, but if you buy something marketed as a router, it's much more likely to have ample buffering and AQM. /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/ _______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
