>>> Noel Kuntze <n...@familie-kuntze.de> schrieb am 14.09.2015 um 13:55 in Nachricht <55f6b5b5.8020...@familie-kuntze.de>:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > Hello Ullrich, > >> Actually I don't understand that claim: If packets are delivered in order >>(mostly), any TOTEM packet has the same change to arrive than any other s/change/chance/ # typing error, maybe lack of coffeine in the morning > packet. >> While all other communication protocols can actually deal with Ethernet and > the >> Internet, TOTEM is the only protocol that can fail even in a switched LAN. I >> haven't benn convinced yet that it's not an implementation issue of TOTEM. >> Instead of telling people to fiddle with their network configuration, I'd >> prefer putting more efforts into fixing TOTEM. > > I assume with "change to arrive", you mean delay? Or do you mean the > ordering of > the packets? > Totem behaves like it does because it needs to detect a failed node, afaik. What totem does it detect network problems when there are none: # grep ringid.*FAULTY /var/log/messages |wc -l 1981 > This is something that no other protocol you encounter on the internet/LAN > is supposed to do. Definitely not: 0 interface errors on any interface, not communication problems. > All of those protocols are either for error reporting (ICMP) or for > transceiving of > data (udp/tcp). UDP obviously has no congestion algorithm, but TCP does. Even NFS over UDP is much smarter than TOTEM is. > >> The main problem with priorities is who decides what is most important, >> especially if a medium is shered by many different software stacks and s/shered/shared/ #se above >> applications. > > Obviously some type of prioritzation has to be done, or at least should be > done, > because some things *are* more important than others. The only thing that > can > control congestion centrally in a computer system is the interface that > controls > access to it, so it's either the NIC or the software that controls access to > it, so the network stack > of the operating system. The problem is a different one when the LAN is > bridged, rather then switched, because then > the transmission of other hosts affects the transmission of one host. If you have a central authority that can decide on each eand every priority you are right. I was talking from practical experience... > - -- > > Mit freundlichen Grüßen/Kind Regards, > Noel Kuntze > > GPG Key ID: 0x63EC6658 > Fingerprint: 23CA BB60 2146 05E7 7278 6592 3839 298F 63EC 6658 > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2 > > iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJV9rWvAAoJEDg5KY9j7GZY3LkP/3vkEppL48nwlAGVpFIbVIRj > HpC6usWTFTaS3s20FOBo+60mtGAi6QnDku05WEkcjKrN8rjb0lll8KKAxCAP5ejO > xofUpmSZp4vs534gpwYotXf8IU4ZwLsF5WEjdtVc0AoVk99TNwS8g7P2eGRybvxy > Qdr+C2I99n4iqr93MRjDRRZj5S6t+PICr7s2hRrGrNIiSO0XJJdnoJWYR2g3DlPi > 9tw2nyb832Pe3eusRqBdXN1lDEw8Amr2apjW6yGlNKlbaVe/TbcxZg4qnuPQtTAa > Jc9pxItG31ZGG6G3SyzQuU2VG1DUGfyqUBAKv//oQtlb8YEklYHfzvhUvf4/XTJn > 5Zcv6IVoTUVVexB6bmQ6sHxbsXpHrb7Y+uViqVNEogJ66I4kTi9jo7DxxW3Mjsct > TSMjGAWEdmhi1KKONuCnqLMvyVdqdF/4VKZhJ6P2NaVQpk/8zXXrp1Q0zJmfupV6 > awQXvwRdAwM4KP+G94KxjFn8J7cuC3a6Hk2LuQp2OL/2IEliN5p8+R0lii6eVev4 > n+wVsgLve/JHMBghNhJTf5Fs6+lUsgOOYt4RK3/gqAFuktE53XqmwdMVjl3yelXR > UR5J3GxQ5AbuhzetbVn1HIVMfOzwjzgW8vjcWmkmB01tOKXyvpyWRjFP6HawLxCh > kWHwsh6S+7OxJ0Oijrs5 > =CyyI > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org > http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf > Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org _______________________________________________ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org