Re: Modeling of Policing component.

ravikumarb wrote:
> 
> >
> > But acording to RFC 3290 in section 3.3, it says that policing can be modeled as a concatenation of an Algorithmic Dropper with a Scheduler. But I guess this should be the model for shaping rather than for policing.
> >
> > Am I missing something here?
> 
> Please read the text more carefully:
> 
>    ...Policing is
>    modeled as either a concatenation of a Meter with an Absolute Dropper
>    or as a concatenation of an Algorithmic Dropper with a Scheduler.
> 
> and (in 7.1.3)
> 
>    An Algorithmic Dropper is an element which selectively discards
>    packets that arrive at its input, based on a discarding algorithm.
> 
> I don't really see a problem here. The scheduler is not part of the policer,
> so maybe it should have been mentioned in brackets, but in real life
> it will always be there. This is an *informal* model.
> 
> >>
> 
> We can have an Algorithmic Dropper as part of Policer, but not a Scheduler. The moment we have a Scheduler, what we are doing is Shaping not policing.

As I said, this is an *informal* model.

   Brian

_______________________________________________
diffserv mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv
Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html