Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 00:36:43 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: net@FreeBSD.ORG, Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com> Subject: Re: netgraph... Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9901290030240.304-100000@s204m82.isp.whistle.com> In-Reply-To: <2105.917596839@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 29 Jan 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > >It is much easier to believe that nodes sending status/control information > >between themselves might do it a lot quicker and more often than > >humans running ngctl. One node might be 'tuning' another in such a way > >that there are many (hundereds?) of these messages per second? > > I fail to come up with an example right now. Opening and closing VCs > is the best I can come up with, and most protocols deliberately make > sure that only happens on a 10s of seconds/minutes time scale (for > accounting reasons). I have theorised about using a set of nodes for such things a flow-control on sub-pipes, where the flow information is passed back and forth, setting up high and low watermarks. In a bursty high capacity medium with several 'subchannels' being controlled, I can imagine these needing to be in thorder of 10s per second. I also am sure that I don't have any idea what this stuff will be used for in teh future if it's successful. I can imagine for example flowcontrol messages toggling a CTS line as a buffer upstream nears a highwatermark. I have two "Interesting" nodes under development which I hope to complete over the weekend. julian To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9901290030240.304-100000>