Cell Relay Archive

[Muddassir Tufail <Muddassir.Tufail@irisa.fr>]

Robert Blackshaw wrote:
> 
> Geert Goossens <gagoosse@info.vub.ac.be> wrote:
> 
> Snip>
> >>
> >I'm afraid I've answered this question w/o checking the actual
> >documents. I though I remember this being defined this way, but now I
> >can't find it back. Maybe I saw it somewhere else or in a specific
> >implementation, I don't remember.
> 
> Sorry to cut so much, suddenly Free Agent is complaining about
> more included text than new text.
> 


This problem is really implemenbtaion dependent. One possible
implementatin policy is to have a switch output port scheduling server
(may be referred as root-server) divided into many sub-servers. Each one
of these sub-servers may be responsible for servicing the cells (with a
scheduling policy like FIFO, weighted fair queuing etc) pertaning to a
particular service class (CBR, rt-VBR, nrt-VBR, ABR or UBR). The
bandwidth  available at root-server may be divided among sub-servers
(either in terms of percentage or by deterministic values). This policy
avoids the following problem:


> Regardless, I wonder did the spec mean that those priorities apply
> across *all* traffic, or just one user's traffic? I imagine that if I have
> both CBR and VBR-rt the CBR gets priority. However, should
> another user's CBR get priority over my VBR-rt even if I do not
> have CBR traffic?
> 
> Bob 

Mudassir
 
---------
 Muddassir Tufail                                           
 ADP, IRISA,                           Off: (33)02 99 84 72 91 
 Campus De Beaulieu,                                        
 Universite de Rennes I,             Email: mtufail@irisa.fr
 35042 Rennes,France.