This discussion - as once a month - is about fairness. But if we define a
domain as a tuple of {process,peer-IP} the fairness is applied only for the
last link before "peer-IP".
But fairness applies to *all* links in between! For example: consider a
dumpbell scenario:
+------+ +------+
| | | |
| H1 | | H3 |
| | | |
+------+ +------+
10MB \ +------+ +------+ / 10MB
\ | | 1MB/s | | /
> | R1 |------------| R2 |<
/ | | | | \
10MB / +------+ +------+ \ 10MB
+------+ +------+
| | | |
| H2 | | H4 |
| | | |
+------+ +------+
How can a domain defined as {process,peer-IP} fair to the 1MB bottleneck link?
It is not fair! And it is also not fair to open n simultaneous streams and so
on. This problem is discussed in several RFC's.
.02
Best regards, Hagen
--
Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@jauu.net> || http://jauu.net/
Telephone: +49 174 5455209 || Key Id: 0x98350C22
Key Fingerprint: 490F 557B 6C48 6D7E 5706 2EA2 4A22 8D45 9835 0C22
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html