Tracking packet/s in the server
alister at ticklers.org
Thu Feb 23 17:12:45 CET 2012
Dropping packets is enough to recovery as long as the server can cope with the average load over the whole day. Basically you push the bubble along until the load drops enough to recover. How this interacts with health-probes from load balancers and other monitoring platforms would be interesting to consider. Perhaps some source IPs should never be dropped ?
On 23 Feb 2012, at 16:07, Brian Candler wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 01:04:10PM +0100, Alan DeKok wrote:
>> I'm not sure what benefits WRED would add.
> I think it is more likely to hit a dynamic equilibrium: the % of packets
> dropped increases proportionately as the queue gets fuller.
> Otherwise I suspect it will become bursty: queue goes over 50% and is
> increasing, we start dropping packets, the queue starts to shrink, we start
> accepting packets for a while, the queue starts to grow, we start dropping
> packets again...
> OTOH, we wouldn't get the full benefit of this unless the NASes implement
> exponential backoff. If they just resend packets every 3 seconds, say, then
> an overload situation will remain an overload situation anyway.
> List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html
More information about the Freeradius-Devel