[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: composite link - candidate for respin, maybe

Subject: Re: composite link - candidate for respin, maybe
From: Tony Li
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 09:26:34 -0700
Hi John,

> If we are placing flows on the component links of a heterogeneous link bundle,
> we may have to look at additional fields within packets and/or maintain
> additional state, relative to what is required to place flows on the component
> links of a homogeneous link bundle.  The example that has been given is flows
> that require low latency.


If we go by the definition that we're working with, a "flow" is atomic and
therefore should never be demuxed, just to ensure ordering.


> I was agreeing with Tony, so please direct this question to him.  (But, I
> don't see any real discussion of IGP scaling requirements.)


I think that this has to come from Dave.  If I get to set the requirements,
I promise a Very Low Bar.   ;-) ;-) ;-)

Tony


_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>