Multi-resource generalized processor sharing for packet processing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Middleboxes have found widespread adoption in today's networks. They perform a variety of network functions such as WAN optimization, intrusion detection, and network-level firewalls. Processing packets to serve these functions often require multiple middlebox resources, e.g., CPU and link band-width. Furthermore, different packet traffic flows may consume significantly different amounts of various resources, depending on the network functions that are applied. Multi-resource fair queueing is therefore needed to allow flows to share multiple middlebox resources in a fair manner. In this paper, we clarify the fairness requirements of a queueing scheme and present Dominant Resource Generalized Processor Sharing (DRGPS), a fluid flow-based fair queueing idealization that strictly realizes Dominant Resource Fairness (DRF) at all times. As a form of Generalized Processor Sharing (GPS) running on multiple resources, DRGPS serves as a benchmark that practical packet-by-packet fair queueing algorithm should follow. With DRGPS, techniques and insights that have been developed for traditional fair queueing can be leveraged to schedule multiple resources. As a case study, we extend Worst-case Fair Weighted Fair Queueing (WF2Q) to the multi-resource setting and analyze its performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".