[2nd Try]:Re: Traffic Management API Questions

[Venky Venkatesh <vvenkatesh@paloaltonetworks.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1946 bytes --]

Hi,
Can someone pls get back on these
Thanks
-Venky

On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 4:07 AM Venky Venkatesh <
vvenkatesh@paloaltonetworks.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> I was looking at the DPDK Traffic Management API. I wanted to clarify some
> things that I understand from the code (for software based TM
> implementation (at 20.11)) vs the documentation.
>
>    - The documentation says "Traffic shaping: single/*dual rate,* private
>    (*per node*) and shared (by *multiple nodes*) shapers" are supported.
>    However it appears that the code supports only *single *rate shapers.
>    Is my understanding correct?
>       - If not, pls point me to where dual rate shaping is supported in
>       the software based TM implementation code.
>       - However, if my understanding is correct, can the authors clarify
>       the nature of issues they ran into in supporting dual rate (which thus
>       prevented them from implementing it)?
>    - The documentation comment above sounds like every node can have
>    shapers. However it appears that the code does not support shaping at the
>    port level. Again the same questions as above(regarding the accuracy of my
>    understanding and if it is accurate, the reasons from the author for not
>    supporting it)
>    - At the level of the TM API (*and* the associated software TM
>    implementation) are there any restrictions on the number of levels of QoS
>    hierarchy we can construct?
>    - Lastly, does the QoS framework API (which I suppose is built on
>    lower level building blocks including the TM API) expose the entire
>    capabilities of the TM API (e.g. dual rate shapers, shapers at port level,
>    > 4 levels of shaping etc.)? From the reading of the documentation it
>    appears that there may be restrictions imposed by the QoS framework API on
>    top of what TM API imposes. Can someone pls confirm this (and if so, the
>    reason for doing so)?
>
>
> Thanks
> -Venky
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2649 bytes --]