Updates using idle bandwidth

[Sunil Ghai]

On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 11:14 AM, Bruno Wolff III <bruno at wolff.to> wrote:

> > >
> > > In case of dynamic throttling we won't be having any _fixed_ rate at
> which
> > > the connections assigned for updates will be able receive the packets.
> It
> > > means packets would be dropped frequently to implement policing.
>  Isn't this
> > > waste of resources?
>
> Yes and a protocol change was made to help. I believe this is the purpose
> of
> ECN (explicit congestion notification).
>
> > > Tools like tc and tcng implement queues to control outbound data. Is
> there
> > > any similar _kind of_ option available for inbound data?
> > > (Obviously we can't have queues because once the packet has been
> received
> > > must be processed)
>
> Shaping on the wrong side of a link is problematic. You can implement
> queues
> on the receiving side which might allow you to better control which flows
> get slowed down using IFBs (which replace the older IMQs). While you can't
> absolutely prevent the other side from swamping the link with low priority
> packets, things should work reasonably with well behaved applications.
>
>
Ingress shaping...sounds good!
Basically it is the way to implement policing efficiently?
-- 
Regards,
Sunil Ghai
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20080324/c57c258a/attachment-0002.html