Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 16:27:58 -0800 (PST) From: Tony Li <tli@jnx.com> To: dennis@etinc.com Cc: isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: changed to: Frac T3? Message-ID: <199611200027.QAA16538@chimp.jnx.com> In-Reply-To: <199611200013.TAA10070@etinc.com> (dennis@etinc.com)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Clearly we're not talking about the same things here...Im not sure what you mean by routing protocol stablity. Are you talking about IP? BGP? or what? BGP, OSPF, whatever... the problem remains the same, only the constants change. IP is largely self throttling, and queue management shouldnt allow for holding packets longer than the protocols allow for. And around we go.... queue management needs to guarantee that "my packets get out in a timely fashion" (sorry, Unix doesn't). Queue management that drops protocol packets is a Bad Thing, as the protocol will fail sooner... >I agree with the goal and the conclusion. I still don't believe that >you've got enough process level control that you can also make the box a >Web server, say and not endanger the protocols. What you fail to mention is "at what point". I dont think we're even asking that question...we're trying to figure out the capabiltiy with minimal processes running. Well, that point is HIGHLY dynamic, so it's a tough call. We can clearly say that it's a function of the demands of the routing protocol and the other applications that you want to run. Roughly, we can characterize the routing protocol in terms of memory requirements, minimal CPU cycles, and I/O needs. We can obviously characterize the hardware. Now, the remainder is the budget that can be safely spent on other apps. Finding apps that will stay within this remainder is the truly hard part, and because Unix doesn't have a nice way to control these processes, most interesting apps can "blossom". If the site has some external ways of controlling things (e.g., the box can only run 5 ftpd's, their window size is X, and they are bandwidth limited by the link) then you have a reasonable solution. Tony
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199611200027.QAA16538>