-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Matthew Toseland wrote: > Well, the advantage of what we have is that it is based on well known, > well studied algorithms which are known to work in practice. So any > replacement would have to either be some means of enforcing the existing > algorithms (which would require being able to identify local requests, > which is bad... unless they are premix routed before becoming local > requests), or something that had been *extensively* simulated and proven > to work.
There's a lot of work on fair queueing that you could look at... but I mean a lot. :-/ It's not my area but the summary here looks useful: http://stelvio.univ.trieste.it/~vitez/Queuing.htm Cheers, Michael -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEPAT7yua14OQlJ3sRAg03AJ9qaLAS2CY+JVl0Jj8YW4ZwkLhLFwCgu+U9 KgFMX2TB1YevYlfhKohOw5s= =obVh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
