Lossy cogent p2p experiences?
Masataka Ohta
mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp
Tue Sep 5 10:01:08 UTC 2023
Nick Hilliard wrote:
>> Are you saying you thought a 100G Ethernet link actually consisting
>> of 4 parallel 25G links, which is an example of "equal speed multi
>> parallel point to point links", were relying on hashing?
>
> this is an excellent example of what we're not talking about in this
> thread.
Not "we", but "you".
> A 100G serdes is an unbuffered mechanism which includes a PLL, and this
> allows the style of clock/signal synchronisation required for the
> deserialised 4x25G lanes to be reserialised at the far end. This is one
> of the mechanisms used for packet / cell / bit spray, and it works
> really well.
That's why I, instead of fully shared buffer, mentioned round robin
as the proper solution for the case.
> This thread is talking about buffered transmission links on routers /
> switches on systems which provide no clocking synchronisation and not
> even a guarantee that the bearer circuits have comparable latencies.
> ECMP / hash based load balancing is a crock, no doubt about it;
See the first three lines of this mail to find that I explicitly
mentioned "equal speed multi parallel point to point links" as the
context for round robin.
As I already told you:
: In theory, you can always fabricate unrealistic counter examples
: against theories by ignoring essential assumptions of the theories.
you are keep ignoring essential assumptions for no good purposes.
Masataka Ohta
More information about the NANOG
mailing list