Re: [LARTC] Patch to allow for the ATM "cell tax"

[Jason Boxman <jasonb@edseek.com>]

On Thursday 02 March 2006 02:30, Russell Stuart wrote:
> I have been trying to optimise my ADSL connections for VOIP.
> Funny things were happening - for example increasing the ping
> packet size by 50% had no effect, but then adding one byte
> had a major effect.  It took me a while to figure out that I
> was seeing the effects of the fixed ATM cell size.
<snip>
> diff -Nur iproute-20051007.keep/tc/q_htb.c iproute-20051007/tc/q_htb.c
> --- iproute-20051007.keep/tc/q_htb.c	2006-03-02 14:50:51.000000000 +1000
> +++ iproute-20051007/tc/q_htb.c	2006-03-02 15:50:31.000000000 +1000

Any chance something like this can be applied to q_tbf?  It's been classful 
for a while and I find a tbf with a prio under it works quite well for my 
configuration.  Jesper's patch indicates untested support for other 
schedulers including tbf, so it's certainly possible.

Thanks.

-- 

Jason Boxman
http://edseek.com/ - Linux and FOSS stuff

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc