From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Markus Schulz Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 02:23:34 +0000 Subject: Re: [LARTC] Patch to allow for the ATM "cell tax" Message-Id: <200603030323.34653.msc@antzsystem.de> List-Id: References: <1141284603.10264.168.camel@ras.pc.brisbane.lube> In-Reply-To: <1141284603.10264.168.camel@ras.pc.brisbane.lube> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: lartc@vger.kernel.org Am Freitag, 3. M=C3=A4rz 2006 02:54 schrieb Russell Stuart: > On Fri, 2006-03-03 at 02:23 +0100, Markus Schulz wrote: > > The second rate table is 100% equivalent to realtime calc. But the > > static version differs for some ip-length values from it. And i > > don't understand why. > > Perhaps someone can point me to the difference? > > The program is only for testing rate tables calculations. > > > > It would be nice to do it without a htb or other qdisc module > > patch. And i think it should be possible :) > > It is not possible. >=20 [.. convincing reasons ..] okay, thanks. After writing some rate tables on a paper i'm really =20 understand the problematic.=20 We need a htb patch or bigger rate tables (#=3Dmtu) :) --=20 Markus Schulz A: Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion Q: Why is top posting bad? _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc