RE: Preemption with MAM RE:
Dimitry Haskin <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.tewg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> > Dimmtry, > > Francois, > > > > > It may be that another model which has independent bandwidth > > constraint + aggregate constraint (this would basically be a > > hybrid between MAM and RDM) is a reasonable idea; but this is > > not MAM as it is currently defined. > > > > Incidentally this is exactly what I have been assuming > regarding the MAM > model. However I agree this is not reflected in the current MAM > specification(s). > > In current MAM specification, > do we have to define the maximum bandwidth such that sum of > the maximum bandwidth of each CT should be the link capacity ? What is definition of the "link capacity" in your question? The aggregate constraint (aka the maximum reservable link B/W) can be higher (or lower) than the actual link capacity. An aggregate constraint does not have to be equal to the sum of the corresponding individual b/w constraints. However this might be a reasonable thing to configure when preemption is not used. Dimitry > > Regards, > > Geunhyung > > > Francois > > > >