[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [ns] Priority in ns, CBQ(parameters)



Hi Carlos!

Thanks for the answer!

My next question would be! What would happen if I had the same priority for
both TCP and UDP packets, but still as before 60% allocation for UDP and 40%
for TCP! Will there be any differences?

What function does the priority have, since the UDP is not allowed to use
more than 60%? 

Thanks in advance

Regards	George

-----Original Message-----
From: Carlos Alberto Kamienski [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2000 11:57 AM
To: George Khoury (ERA)
Cc: 'Haobo Yu'; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [ns] Priority in ns, CBQ(parameters)


> I thought since I have 60% and 40% allocation, the TCP could never get
> complitely starved!! Am I wrong?

No. You are correct. This is the idea! Unless the CBQ implementation could
present in some time a silly error, starvation should never happen if the
queue has a minimum amount of link bandwidth.

Carlos

> 
> Thanks in advance
> 
> Regards	George
>