Hi again,
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 1:41 PM, <nscl...@gmx.de> wrote:
>> ns-3 has no notion of processing delay as of now.
>
> Thanks Lalith for the information.
> My problem is that an element with the following code (for testing purposes)
> influences my simulation results. If I comment the lines for scheduling, the
> simulation results are ok.
> How can the following code influence the simulation result? The only thing
> the code does is configuring the scheduler for the next event. But the code
> does not produce packets for the simulation.
> Could someone explanin me how a code that only schedules itself can influence
> the simulation?
>
>
> int Foo::initialize( ErrorHandler * )
> {
> _timer.initialize( this );
> uint32_t start = ( random() % _period );
> _timer.schedule_after_msec( start );
> return 0;
> }
>
> void Foo::run_timer(Timer *)
> {
> int period = ( int ) ( _period * .95 + ( random() % ( _period / 10 )
> ) );
> _timer.reschedule_after_msec( period );
> }
The above snippet of code can end up changing the sequence of events
that arrive at ns-3's scheduler.
What I meant when I said that ns-3 does not model processing delay, is
that every packet is processed by an ns-3 node in 0.0 nanoseconds in
simulation time.
> _______________________________________________
> click mailing list
> click@amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu
> https://amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/click
--
Lalith Suresh
www.lalith.in
_______________________________________________
click mailing list
click@amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu
https://amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/click
