From owner-freebsd-isp  Tue Nov 19 16:04:22 1996
Return-Path: owner-isp
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA17454
          for isp-outgoing; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 16:04:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from red.jnx.com (red.jnx.com [208.197.169.254])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA17446
          for <isp@freebsd.org>; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 16:04:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from chimp.jnx.com (chimp.jnx.com [208.197.169.246]) by red.jnx.com (8.8.3/8.8.3) with ESMTP id QAA16952; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 16:03:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from tli@localhost) by chimp.jnx.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id QAA16488; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 16:03:39 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 16:03:39 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199611200003.QAA16488@chimp.jnx.com>
From: Tony Li <tli@jnx.com>
To: dennis@etinc.com
CC: isp@freebsd.org
In-reply-to: <199611200001.TAA09973@etinc.com> (dennis@etinc.com)
Subject: Re: changed to: Frac T3?
Sender: owner-isp@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


   >As I think I pointed out in another message, "it" is a guarantee of
   cycles >and I/O to the routing protocols.

   There is no "guarantee" in unix, so you cant answer the question with
   your method. The best you can do is guess.

You can "guarantee" this by not giving the box other stuff to do....

   Dropping packets occasionally can't be avoided without great
   overexpenditure, so the best we can try for is "very infrequently"....

Umm.... yes, but that's orthogonal to the discussion.

Tony