nanog mailing list archives
Re: Cisco HFR
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch () muada com>
Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 19:00:53 +0200
On 26-mei-04, at 18:45, Petri Helenius wrote:
(BTW, you'll experience very little fragmentation if you make sure your box never comes close to running out of memory.)
Reminds me of the fact that you need very little of "QoS" support if you make sure your links never come close to running full. Amazingly that´s still a very popular feature to ask for.
Well, if you can survive periods where memory requirements go beyond 100% of what's available without adverse effects anyway, why would fragmentation be a problem for you? Or maybe it's not really the same thing...
Current thread:
- Re: Cisco HFR, (continued)
- Re: Cisco HFR Leo Bicknell (May 25)
- Re: Cisco HFR Mark Prior (May 25)
- Re: Cisco HFR Deepak Jain (May 25)
- Re: Cisco HFR Steven M. Bellovin (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Jared Mauch (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Iljitsch van Beijnum (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Adrian Chadd (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Alexei Roudnev (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Robert E. Seastrom (May 27)
- Re: Cisco HFR Steven M. Bellovin (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Petri Helenius (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Iljitsch van Beijnum (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Leo Bicknell (May 25)
- Re: Cisco HFR Petri Helenius (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Kurt Erik Lindqvist (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Tony Li (May 26)
- Re: Cisco HFR Petri Helenius (May 27)
- Re: Cisco HFR Iljitsch van Beijnum (May 27)
- Re: Cisco HFR Deepak Jain (May 27)
- RE: Cisco HFR Neil J. McRae (May 27)
- Re: Cisco HFR Kevin Oberman (May 25)