Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Cerowrt-devel Digest, Vol 44, Issue 24

[Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>]

On Sun, 19 Jul 2015, Jonathan Morton wrote:

> In the current version, a bandwidth threshold is used instead. If the 
> traffic in the class remains below the threshold, then they get the (non 
> strict) priority requested. If it strays above, the priority is demoted 
> below other classes instead. In the absence of competing traffic, any 
> class can use the full available bandwidth, but there's always room for 
> other classes to start up.

I had an idea of using DSCP 000xx0 and have a BE+, BE and BE-. BE+ would 
be scheduled to send packets twice as often as BE, and BE- would be 1/10th 
of (BE+ BE).

I keep getting pushback from the DSCP authors that he BE- idea wouldn't be 
a problem (and they agree that it makes sense for a scavenger class), but 
that my idea of BE+ should be something else, for instance AFxy. I don't 
believe anything that isn't 000xxx will ever get widely deployed for 
Internet use, and there should be no strict priority but just a slight 
preference for scheduling packets with the BE+ code point, exactly to make 
DDOS less of an impact.

What is your opinion on this concept?

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se