Thread: Superhub Bufferbloat - is it bad?
View Single Post
Old 24-01-2016, 19:57   #29
Ignitionnet
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Leeds, West Yorkshire
Age: 47
Posts: 13,995
Ignitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny stars
Ignitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny stars
Re: Bufferbloat - is it bad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth View Post
Since it is non-ping traffic that matters, the low priority ping has to wait. What's the big deal here? Of course latency changes under load. Realms of ...
On things like Superhubs and the CMTS that feed them the ping doesn't have any priority, low or otherwise. Everything is treated equally.

CMTS sending pings to end users treats it with the same priority as other traffic. The big routers only prioritise traffic that has them as the destination unless told otherwise.

Control plane versus forwarding plane. Traffic for router takes control plane, traffic passing through router forwarding plane.
Ignitionnet is offline   Reply With Quote