[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: composite link - candidate for respin, maybe

Subject: Re: composite link - candidate for respin, maybe
From: Curtis Villamizar
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 02:55:44 -0400
In message <[email protected]>
John E Drake writes:
>  
>  
> > John,
> > 
> > When nothing is being moved nothing is reordered.  If a flow or many
> > flows is moved from a link with longer delay to one with shorter
> > delay, unless the flow is stopped and bufferered for at least the
> > delay difference and then drained, then reordering will occur.
> > 
> > So I agree with Tony.  It is not practical to avoid reordering when
> > traffic is moved.  It is therefore minimally disruptive.  The products
> > of your new employer do the same thing.
> [JD] 
>  
> One last time: Flows may be re-ordered, but packets within flows are
> not re-ordered.  This is no different than placing flows of a single
> LSP on multiple component links, which is a required behavior.  The
> only difference is that when an LSP is pinned to a specific component
> link, this only occurs when the LSP is being pinned to a new component
> link using MBB.



John,

You are making no sense at all.

Consider the case where only one flow exists.  Two path exist, A and
B.  Path A is used.  It has a longer delay than B.  The difference in
delay is N packet times.  When switching from A to B, the first packet
to arrive on path B arrives N-1 packets before the last packet to go
into link B.  Packets from that one flow are interleaved for about N
packets.

The case that we are talking about is moving a flow or group of flows
from one link to another.  It is minimally disruptive.  Do you have a
problem with that wording?

Curtis

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

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