[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ipng
Subject:    (IPng 4040) Re: Qry on Traffic Policing (IPv6 header
From:       Paul Ferguson <pferguso () cisco ! com>
Date:       1997-06-21 11:11:19
[Download RAW message or body]

At 12:51 AM 06/21/97 -0400, HDhil@aol.com wrote:

>
>Has anybody proposed ideas like having a high-priority ICMP or other type of
>IP packet indicate downstream congestion on particular router links so the
>rate at which packets are forwarded on those particular links can be changed
>in a responsive fashion? Or is this more like the Controlled Load service in
>RSVP? Is an ABR-like service anathema in any way to IP since people like Mpps
>figures instead?
>

I get an uneasy feeling when people start discussing explicit feedback
mechanisms within IP when TCP does the Right Thing (tm) in the face of
loss. What I had mentioned earlier was the use of the precedence/priority
field to indicate the probability of drop in a congestion situation. This
would be marked (or policed) at network ingress, or could be set by the
originating host. If there is no congestion, everyone is happy. If there
is congestion, then an weighted congestion avoidance mechanism (similar
to what is discussed in http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~wuchang/ered/) would
determine which packets are dropped first based on the priority.

Food for thought.

- paul

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]