[RPRWG] The upstream is more aggressive than the downstream
Hi all,
Recently I simulate the fairness scenarios in annex I. The effect is a little interesting. Could you give me some comments or suggestion?
Configuration:
flow(s1->s3) 100% --------------------------------------------->
flow(s2->s3) 100% ----------------->
--> s1---------------------------> s2----------------------------> s3 --------------------->
<----------------------SCFF messages (s1<-s2)
unreservedRate=maxAllowedRate=shaperD=linkRate, reserved=0 stqLowThreshold = 1MTU stqMedThreshold = 2MTU stqHighThreshold = 3MTU rampUpCoef =6, rampDownCoef =6
weight of s1 : weight of s2 = 2:1 (the output of aggressive mode and conservative mode is very close.)
1. packet size =64 s1->s3:s2->s3 = 1.94 :1
2. packet size = 512 s1->s3:s2->s3 = 2.08 :1
3. packet size = 1024 s1->s3:s2->s3 = 2.13 :1
weight of s1 : weight of s2 = 1:2 (the output of aggressive mode and conservative mode is very close.)
1. packet size =64 s1->s3:s2->s3 = 1:1.26
2. packet size = 512 s1->s3:s2->s3 ~= 1:1
3. packet size = 1024 s1->s3:s2->s3 ~= 1:1
unreservedRate=maxAllowedRate=80% linkRate reserved=20% linkRate shaperD=100%linkRate
Other Configurable Variable is unchanged
weight of s1 : weight of s2 = 1:2 (the output of aggressive mode)
1. packet size =64 s1->s3:s2->s3 = 1: 1.9
2. packet size = 512 s1->s3:s2->s3 = 1:1.65
3. packet size = 1024 s1->s3:s2->s3 = 1: 1.6
weight of s1 : weight of s2 = 1:2 conservative mode
1. packet size =64 s1->s3:s2->s3 = 1.14:1
2. packet size = 512 s1->s3:s2->s3 = 1.38:1
3. packet size = 1024 s1->s3:s2->s3 = 1.2 :1
The questions:
1. Why upstream is so greed?
2. Is there any other parameter which will impact the effect of FA?
3. How to decide ageCoef? -- Based on Table9.6 in D3.0, OC3--ageCoef=8, OC12-ageCoef=8, OC48-ageCoef=2, OC192-ageCoef=1/2
It seems rateCoef * ageCoef always equal to 1, so normCoef =localWeight, is it right?
Thanks,
Winnie Shao
Senior Software Engineer
IXA Development Center, Shenzhen Branch, PRC
I-net: 8-754-1008