Re: [RPRWG] ConservativeRate SM questions
Necdet,
Thank you for quick response and help. Appreciated!
Regarding the 1st item below, the condition probably should just be
localFairRate >= unreservedRate[myRi].
That is, the left side need NOT be divided by localWeight.
Generally, a reasonable localFairRate should be <= unrevervedRate.
When localFairRate ramps up and reaches or exceeds unreservedRate,
localCongestion condition can be cleared.
Regards,
Guoliang
Necdet Uzun wrote:
> Guoliang,
>
> Please see below.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Necdet
>
> Guoliang Wu wrote:
>
>> Hello RPR experts:
>>
>> I have some questions regarding the conservative rate adjust State
>> Machine
>> from the released RPR standard (802.17-2004.pdf, Table 10.9, pages
>> 258 - 259).
>>
>> 1. Row 5: the condition is
>> localFairRate/localWeight >= unreservedRate[myRi] - rampUpCoef.
>
>
> This is a typo. - rampUpCoef should not be there. I.e., it should be
> just:
> localFairRate/localWeight >= unreservedRate[myRi]
>
>> It seems having some typo in the right side, because unreservedRate
>> is in bytes and
>> rampUpCoef is a pure number.
>> 2. Row 5 and Row 16: the allowedRate is calculated twice in the
>> two states, first in Row 5 as
>> allowedRate += (maxAllowedRate - allowedRate) / rampUpCoef;
>> then after transiting from CGST state to FINAL state,
>> allowedRate = Min(unreservedRate[myRi], localFairRate);
>
> You are right, the calculation in row 5:
>
> allowedRate += (maxAllowedRate - allowedRate) / rampUpCoef;
>
> is not needed (and overwritten later) as allowedRate has to be set to
> normalized localFairRate in conservative mode of operation.
>
>> The later calculation invalids the early one. One of the
>> calculations should be
>> removed or changed.
>> Hope someone can clarify. Your help will be greatly appreciated!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Guoliang Wu
>> Fujitsu Network Communications, Inc.
>> Richardson, TX 75082
>>
>
>