* [LARTC] Re: For leaf classes is best PFIFO or SFQ?
@ 2006-06-02 7:51 Jarek Poplawski
2006-06-02 11:09 ` Stefano Mainardi
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jarek Poplawski @ 2006-06-02 7:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lartc
Stefano Mainardi wrote:
> Hi to all,
> i'm following this guide (http://www.opalsoft.net/qos/DS-28.htm), is
> very detailed, but i'm a bit confused about queuing disciplinse of
> leaf classes.
>
> In this guide the author uses PFIFO (see the scheme that i attached at
> message) in this way:
>
> # tc class add dev eth0 parent 1:21 handle 210: pfifo lmit 10
rather that way:
# tc qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:21 handle 210: pfifo limit 10
Jarek P.
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [LARTC] Re: For leaf classes is best PFIFO or SFQ?
2006-06-02 7:51 [LARTC] Re: For leaf classes is best PFIFO or SFQ? Jarek Poplawski
@ 2006-06-02 11:09 ` Stefano Mainardi
2006-06-04 16:27 ` Kajetan Staszkiewicz
2006-06-06 0:57 ` Damjan
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Stefano Mainardi @ 2006-06-02 11:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lartc
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 741 bytes --]
2006/6/2, Jarek Poplawski <jarkap@poczta.onet.pl>:
>
> Stefano Mainardi wrote:
> > Hi to all,
> > i'm following this guide (http://www.opalsoft.net/qos/DS-28.htm), is
> > very detailed, but i'm a bit confused about queuing disciplinse of
> > leaf classes.
> >
> > In this guide the author uses PFIFO (see the scheme that i attached at
> > message) in this way:
> >
> > # tc class add dev eth0 parent 1:21 handle 210: pfifo lmit 10
>
> rather that way:
>
> # tc qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:21 handle 210: pfifo limit 10
therefore??? I do not understand ...
--
Stefano Mainardi
Presidente Associazione ILDN - Italian Linux Distro Network
Mobile: 349/3917212
Skype: mainardistefano
IM (ICQ): 250-292-408
Blog: http://www.mainardistefano.org
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1147 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 143 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [LARTC] Re: For leaf classes is best PFIFO or SFQ?
2006-06-02 7:51 [LARTC] Re: For leaf classes is best PFIFO or SFQ? Jarek Poplawski
2006-06-02 11:09 ` Stefano Mainardi
@ 2006-06-04 16:27 ` Kajetan Staszkiewicz
2006-06-06 0:57 ` Damjan
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Kajetan Staszkiewicz @ 2006-06-04 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lartc
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1210 bytes --]
Dnia piątek, 2 czerwca 2006 13:09, Stefano Mainardi napisał(a):
> 2006/6/2, Jarek Poplawski <jarkap@poczta.onet.pl>:
> > Stefano Mainardi wrote:
> > > Hi to all,
> > > i'm following this guide (http://www.opalsoft.net/qos/DS-28.htm), is
> > > very detailed, but i'm a bit confused about queuing disciplinse of
> > > leaf classes.
> > >
> > > In this guide the author uses PFIFO (see the scheme that i attached at
> > > message) in this way:
> > >
> > > # tc class add dev eth0 parent 1:21 handle 210: pfifo lmit 10
^^^^^
> >
> > rather that way:
> >
> > # tc qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:21 handle 210: pfifo limit 10
^^^^^
>
> therefore??? I do not understand ...
Well, pfifo is a discipline at the end of class, not the class.
I'm using sfq for every customer (the are limited to 256/384/512kbit), so they
will be able to use the Internet even when using p2p programs.
--
| pozdrawiam / greetings | powered by Trustix, Gentoo and FreeBSD |
| Kajetan Staszkiewicz | jabber,email,www: vegeta()tuxpowered net |
| Vegeta | IMQ devnames: http://www.tuxpowered.net |
`------------------------^------------------------------------------'
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 143 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [LARTC] Re: For leaf classes is best PFIFO or SFQ?
2006-06-02 7:51 [LARTC] Re: For leaf classes is best PFIFO or SFQ? Jarek Poplawski
2006-06-02 11:09 ` Stefano Mainardi
2006-06-04 16:27 ` Kajetan Staszkiewicz
@ 2006-06-06 0:57 ` Damjan
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Damjan @ 2006-06-06 0:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lartc
> Well, pfifo is a discipline at the end of class, not the class.
>
> I'm using sfq for every customer (the are limited to 256/384/512kbit), so they
> will be able to use the Internet even when using p2p programs.
But p2p programs create a lot of connection flows, so statistically SFQ
will give the p2p a lot more traffic to them, compared to just several
flows for "normal" trafic like http, pop3 and smtp.
Or you're doing something else too?
--
damjan | дамјан
This is my jabber ID --> damjan@bagra.net.mk
-- not my mail address, it's a Jabber ID --^ :)
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-06-06 0:57 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2006-06-02 7:51 [LARTC] Re: For leaf classes is best PFIFO or SFQ? Jarek Poplawski
2006-06-02 11:09 ` Stefano Mainardi
2006-06-04 16:27 ` Kajetan Staszkiewicz
2006-06-06 0:57 ` Damjan
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.