You need an extra 9 lines to handle the overrun. On May 23, 2017 12:10:52 PM PDT, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: >On Tue, 23 May 2017 15:07:14 -0300, Pedro de Botelho Marcos said: > >> Dynamic agreements offer many opportunities. For example, consider >> acquiring extra "bandwidth as a service" that is available on demand >just >> when one needs it, similarly to how one might spin up extra VMs in >the >> cloud to handle high loads. > >In computer science, all problems can be solved by adding a level of >indirection. > >You've now changed it from lengthy discussion about the connection, to >lengthy >discussion about which dynamic agreements both sides are willing to >support. > >Hint: You can't discuss "bandwidth as a service" without both sides >talking >about how much burst capacity might be needed, because the capacity >would *still* >require over-provisioning in order to be available if needed. If both >ends >of the link have 1G optics, you're not going to burst to 10G no matter >how >many dynamic agreements you have.
-- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
