Re: Question the other way round:
"Sergey Gorinsky" <[email protected]> Sat, 16 Nov 2013 21:21:57 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.end2end |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Dear Vimal, > Also, instead of one size fits all, you can have a hierarchical scheduler setup: > > - At the top level, divide bandwidth in some fashion between class A and B > - Class A has small buffers. > - Class B has large buffers. > - Flows that need low delay are directed to class A's queues. > - Flows that need high throughput are directed to class B's queues. > > This way you can get a "bit" of both objectives while ensuring each class > gets a certain bandwidth guarantee. The RD (Rate-Delay) design gives a choice between two best-effort services, one with low delay and the other with higher throughput: "Leveraging the Rate-Delay Trade-off for Service Differentiation in Multi-Provider Networks" by M. Podlesny and S. Gorinsky, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 29(5), pp. 997-1008, May 2011, http://fourier.networks.imdea.org/~sergey_gorinsky/pdf/JSAC_Leveraging_Rate- Delay.pdf Thank you, Sergey