From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: George Nychis <gnychis@cmu.edu>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 04:54:51 +0000
Subject: [LARTC] any alternative to netem drop? slow
Message-Id: <4449317B.5020300@cmu.edu>
List-Id: <lartc.vger.kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org

Hi,

I was wondering if there is any alternative to netem drop probability... 
the reason I ask is that whenever I turn it on I get about 500KB/sec 
less throughput with 0% packet loss

The caveat is that it must work with 2.4.32 :)

Thanks!
George


Jason Boxman wrote:

>On Thursday 20 April 2006 22:19, Francisco wrote:
>  
>
>>L7 filter works very well too:
>>http://l7-filter.sourceforge.net/
>>
>>Although I didn't try it with sip, I use it to control my P2P and server
>>applications and have a very usable ADSL link at almost 100% utilization of
>>my upstream.
>>    
>>
>
>Does any of that include eMule traffic?  I stopped having success with eMule 
>protocols and L7 a year or two ago and the pattern hasn't been updated in 
>ages.
>
>  
>
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc