Date: Sun, 25 Jun 1995 11:40:50 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> To: dennis@et.htp.com (dennis) Cc: phk@freefall.cdrom.com, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD as a router Message-ID: <199506251840.LAA01851@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> In-Reply-To: <199506251650.MAA26983@mail.htp.com> from "dennis" at Jun 25, 95 12:50:53 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > >> >Here is the funny shaped conical hat, please go think about what you > >> >said for a while <:-). > >> > > >> I love this "I can demonstrate" stuff. Try the hat on yourself. To get from > >> a to b to c requires 2 transmission times at 10mbs (because you have to wait > >> for the full frame to arrive, which was what we were talking about) , which > >> means that net throughput cannot be greater than 50% of 10mbs. > >> > > > >Why shouldn't I be able to receive the next frame while transmitting the > >first one ? > > > >Recv Frame 1 Recv Frame 2 Recv Frame 3 > >------------> ------------> ------------> > > Send Frame 1 Send Frame 2 ... > > > > It has nothing to do with receiving while transmitting, it has to do with > physical science. > > Box A ----> Box B (the Ethernet Router) -----> Box C > > I transmit a frame from Box A to Box B. For simplicity say it takes 100 > microseconds to get to point B at 10mbs. I now need to re-transmit the ... Your are seriously confusing latency with throughput. I agree that we will see a 200uS latency for your sensario, but that does not necessarily make the throughput 1/200uS*packetsize. Latency does not effect throughput for non acked data streams and may not effect it for acked data streams if the window size is such that the pipe is kept full. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com Accurate Automation Company Reliable computers for FreeBSD
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199506251840.LAA01851>