Hi, On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 04:05:16PM +0000, Phil Mayers wrote: > >So indeed, flow control is not a panacea. I agree with this :-) > > An interesting wrinkle (to some) is that stock flow control is not QoS > (i.e. 802.1p codepoint) aware - it's all-or-nothing, meaning your > low-bandwidth diffserv/EF flow gets paused as well as your less-then > best-effort 999.9mbit/sec FTP transfer :o(
Oh. Even better point. So yes, flow control definitely needs to be
activated with care.
"Big buffers" is it, then :-) - plus "big pipes!".
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
//www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025 g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
pgpa2kHZUIJIy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
