Re: Answer to Dave Reed Re: Fwd: Re: Question the other way round:
Andrew Mcgregor <[email protected]> Fri, 29 Nov 2013 10:24:13 +1100
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.end2end |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAPRuP3nenqLDbpk=N5_eZ18pkt3onHqEjJZc5WGhe4d0eo7W6g@mail.gmail.com> |
In which case... measure, don't assume. Served us well for 802.11 modulation selection, I don't see why it shouldn't work for AQM. On 29 November 2013 04:05, Detlef Bosau <[email protected]> wrote: > I think it was stated quite often already, but all these QoS concepts > work pretty fine in wire line networks or in some well designed wireless > point to point networks. > > As soon as any other wireless concepts come into play, you cannot even > bridge the gap between net data rate and throughput > > Detlef > > Am 28.11.2013 06:17, schrieb [email protected]: > >> Another issue is that QoS is often achieved at layer 2, hence most of > >> the work is done at the ATM, cell relay, frame relay, MLPS .... level, > >> is there really that much work done at the IP layer or higher? > > In our case, QoS is normally configured at L3, at the network edge. > > *Queuing* often takes place at L2 (MPLS) in the core of the network, > > but there is of course also queuing at the edge. > > > > Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, [email protected] > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Detlef Bosau > Galileistraße 30 > 70565 Stuttgart Tel.: +49 711 5208031 > mobile: +49 172 6819937 > skype: detlef.bosau > ICQ: 566129673 > [email protected] http://www.detlef-bosau.de > > -- Andrew McGregor | SRE | [email protected] | +61 4 8143 7128