On Tue, 14 Dec 2010, George Bonser wrote:
that sort of delay. Some form of AQM is probably a good thing as would
be the wider use of ECN. Finding out that a buffer filled and a packet
(or many packets) was dropped five seconds after the fact, isn't going
ECN pretty much needs WRED, and then people need to implement that first.
The only routing platform I know to support it is 7200 and the other types
of cpu routers from Cisco running fairly recent IOS (seems to have been
introduced in 12.2T).
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_2t/12_2t8/feature/guide/ftwrdecn.html
You need enough buffering to satisfy packets "in flight" for a
connection on the other side of the planet but man, what he has been
reporting is just insane and it would be no wonder performance can be
crap.
Yeah, 30-60ms of buffering is what I have favoured so far.
With L2 switches you don't get anywhere near that, but on the other side a
few ms of buffering+tail drop has much less impact on interactive
applications compared to seconds of buffering.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swm...@swm.pp.se
