Additionally, ECN is just between hosts, end to end. If an flow is not ECN
enabled (neither of the ECN bits set), then the routing gear does what it
always has done, drop a packet. Only if one of the ECN bits is already set
(meaning the flow is ECN aware, end to end) does the router set the ot
>
> This sounds a lot like most peoples ipv6 rationale as well.
>
>
> I'm still feeling some scars from last time Ecn was enabled in my
> hosts. Many firewalls would eat packets with. Ecn enabled.
That was, I believe, nearly 10 years ago, was it not?
There has been considerable testing with
See below
Jared Mauch
On Jan 27, 2012, at 9:13 PM, George Bonser wrote:
>> Router(config)# policy-map pol1
>> Router(config-pmap)# class class-default
>> Router(config-pmap-c)# bandwidth per 70
>> Router(config-pmap-c)# random-detect
>> Router(config-pmap-c)# random-detect ecn
>>
>> Requires o
On 01/28/2012 10:28 AM, Jim Gettys wrote:
> On 01/27/2012 08:31 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
for those who say bufferbloat is a problem, do you have wred enabled
on backbone or customer links?
>>> For *most backbone networks* it is a no-op on the backbone. To be
>>> more precise, if the backbon
On 01/27/2012 08:31 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>>> for those who say bufferbloat is a problem, do you have wred enabled
>>> on backbone or customer links?
>> For *most backbone networks* it is a no-op on the backbone. To be
>> more precise, if the backbone is at least 10x, and preferably more
>> like 5
In a message written on Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 11:02:14AM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
> one problem is that we do not have good tools to look at a link and
> suggest parms. how did you derive those?
It's actually simple math, it just can get moderate complex.
Let's say you have a 10Mbps ethernet inte
> Router(config)# policy-map pol1
> Router(config-pmap)# class class-default
> Router(config-pmap-c)# bandwidth per 70
> Router(config-pmap-c)# random-detect
> Router(config-pmap-c)# random-detect ecn
>
> Requires other bits in the network to be ECN aware, but if they are,
> good stuff.
>
> -
In a message written on Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 10:31:20AM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
> (embarrassed to say, but to set an honest example, i do not believe iij
> does)
I also want to take this opportunity to say there are some cool new
features (that I have not had a chance to deploy myself) that may h
>> when a line card is designed to buffer the b*d of a trans-pac 40g, the
>> oddities on an intra-pop link have been observed to spike to multiple
>> seconds.
> Please turn that buffer down.
not my router. research probes seeing fun anomalies around the global
network.
> cribbing from a previous
In a message written on Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 10:31:20AM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
> when a line card is designed to buffer the b*d of a trans-pac 40g, the
> oddities on an intra-pop link have been observed to spike to multiple
> seconds.
Please turn that buffer down.
It's bad enough to take a 100m
>> for those who say bufferbloat is a problem, do you have wred enabled
>> on backbone or customer links?
>
> For *most backbone networks* it is a no-op on the backbone. To be
> more precise, if the backbone is at least 10x, and preferably more
> like 50x faster than the largest single TCP flow f
In a message written on Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 10:06:20AM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
> for those who say bufferbloat is a problem, do you have wred enabled on
> backbone or customer links?
For *most backbone networks* it is a no-op on the backbone. To be
more precise, if the backbone is at least 10x,
for those who say bufferbloat is a problem, do you have wred enabled on
backbone or customer links?
randy
13 matches
Mail list logo
