Re: [RPRWG] MAC Question
Ray:
I guess the answer is that the group is still debating this issue. Some
vendors prefer to have a largish transit buffer where transit frames
are stored. Others are proposing "cut through" transit functionality.
I personally feel that latency will be larger in the first approach.
On another note I do not believe that the similarity with 802.5 is
on the lines of claiming a token etc. etc. The MAC mechanism
is going to be different.
Hope this helps.
Ajay Sahai
Ray Zeisz wrote:
> I am following the .17 group from afar, but I have a question:
>
> Is it acceptable for each node in the ring to buffer up an entire packet
> before forwarding it to its neighbor? Would the latency be to great if this
> were done? Or is the .17 direction more along the lines of 802.5 where only
> a few bits in each ring node are buffered...just enough to detect a token
> and set a bit to claim it.
>
> Ray
>
> Ray Zeisz
> Technology Advisor
> LVL7 Systems
> http://www.LVL7.com
> (919) 865-2735
begin:vcard
n:Sahai;Ajay
tel;pager:800-366-5546
tel;fax:845-731-2011
tel;work:845-731-2023
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
email;internet:Ajay.Sahai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
title:Sr. Software Engineer
adr;quoted-printable:;;P.O. Box 1609,=0D=0A6th Floor, Two Blue Plaza,;Pearl River;New York;10965;USA
end:vcard