Yuchung Cheng <ych...@google.com> wrote: > > Interesting work. Do the queues share the same memory pool?
I don't believe the draft says one way or the other; but the concept would seem to call for separate memory. > I hypothesize that with current ECN deployment, the bad (reno) guy > will take up C_Q. What happens when the nice guy (dctcp) knocks the > door when the house is full? the strict priority policy in the doc > isn't clear about which butt to boot ... The pseudocode in Appendix A isn't the easiest to read; but it does show that the L4S queue goes out first (with CE marking) before the Classic queue. The draft is also clear that the example applies AQM on exit from the queues. Thus the Classic queue (in this example) could easily fill available memory; so your question is appropriate. The draft is a bit hand-wavy about what happens when there's too much L4S traffic. IMHO, _one_ necessary feature would be to limit the size of the L4S queue and drop L4S traffic that won't fit. -- John Leslie <j...@jlc.net> _______________________________________________ aqm mailing list aqm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
