From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Boreham Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:22:15 +0000 Subject: Re: [LARTC] FW: Some queueing disciplines that I wrote. Message-Id: <43528C47.9040301@boreham.org> List-Id: References: <9A21B9DC026C80439FBD8C5B197AE04B70CD91@zeta.usq.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <9A21B9DC026C80439FBD8C5B197AE04B70CD91@zeta.usq.edu.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: lartc@vger.kernel.org Stephen Braithwaite wrote: >The definition of a flow need not be the TCP definition of a flow. >I am not sure if it will help, but any the queuing discipline and ingress que filter are >able to work with any combination of protocol, source port number, source ip, dest port, dest ip as the definition of a flow. This may or may not help. > > Ah, that's very interesting. So you could assign all traffic to/from a 'hog' ISP customer to the elephant category. _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc