[Starlink] The "reasons" that bufferbloat isn't a problem
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Fri Jun 7 03:51:24 EDT 2024
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 07:36:36AM +0200, Sebastian Moeller via Starlink wrote:
> it might show that big iron silicon is just inferior to general purpose CPUs
Well, different criteria for "inferior", I'd say. A general purpose
CPU won't be able to feed something with 24x 100Gbit - and a switch
network processor won't be good for running a database...
For queueing/shaping, the network chips have become surprisingly good -
not sure about libreqos & friends, but "doing proper shaping to sub-
linerate to avoid policing drops in a carrier network further downstream"
was something switches just couldn't do, and recent gear (Jericho 2+)
does this quite well. With proper burst size configured, no bufferbloat
there either :)
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Ingo Lalla,
Karin Schuler, Sebastian Cler
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
More information about the Starlink
mailing list