Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2003 00:24:02 -0700 From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> To: Eugene Grosbein <eugen@kuzbass.ru> Cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ipprecedence Message-ID: <20030706002402.A58528@xorpc.icir.org> In-Reply-To: <3F078E39.ABC0822F@kuzbass.ru>; from eugen@kuzbass.ru on Sun, Jul 06, 2003 at 10:49:29AM %2B0800 References: <20030703002247.A2097@grosbein.pp.ru> <3F0310CE.5070302@tenebras.com> <3F03867A.79F82968@kuzbass.ru> <20030705123332.A60972@xorpc.icir.org> <3F078E39.ABC0822F@kuzbass.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jul 06, 2003 at 10:49:29AM +0800, Eugene Grosbein wrote: > Luigi Rizzo wrote: > > > Bottom line -- the whole architecture has been designed with > > FIFO in mind, and implementing any different queueing policy > > will involve some significant rewriting of the device drivers, > > plus, potentially, some significant performance loss. > > Thank you for detailed explanation. I hope that dummynet's WFQ > would be sufficient but not sure: will it correctly process > weights whith zero-bandwidth pipe? zero-bw pipes are only useful to add delay or to count traffic (e.g. using masks), but will never cause queues to build up and so won't help in your case. cheers luigi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030706002402.A58528>