[LARTC] low delay stuff..

[LARTC] low delay stuff..

[raptor]

i was thinking is there a way to include some mechanism 
for high priority selection&queueing mechnism... so that we can 
get better support for low-delay traffic..
Every now and then I see a question on the list, how to handle
video&audio&game traffic, and no definitive answer to this question..
There has to be solution :"), let me tell i'm not a c-programmer so i cant do that,
but think there is a way to achieve this in not so hard way...my proposal is
to make something similar to the way cisco do it..i.e.
Have one high priority queue/class that have higher priority over the other classes,
probably we can do this now but it is not made as exception i.e. depends from
your setup, what other classes do u have...etc...

My idea is to have an exception for this super class with shortened "network-path",
so that we get lower possible delays.. i thik in cisco they called it priority-queue

Is such thing feasable or it can be acomplished with current qdiscs and
work even under heavy load with thousand of classes...


tia

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

Re: [LARTC] low delay stuff..

[Roy]

I think all htb shaper is based in this idea
shaper do not drop packets it just queues them and dequeues acording
priority and bandwitch if there is no space in queue then forwarded packet
wil be lost
what can you suggest better?

what do you mean with "shortened network-path"

I think it is exactly bad that htb is optimized for speed and not for
functionality.



> i was thinking is there a way to include some mechanism
> for high priority selection&queueing mechnism... so that we can
> get better support for low-delay traffic..
> Every now and then I see a question on the list, how to handle
> video&audio&game traffic, and no definitive answer to this question..
> There has to be solution :"), let me tell i'm not a c-programmer so i cant
do that,
> but think there is a way to achieve this in not so hard way...my proposal
is
> to make something similar to the way cisco do it..i.e.
> Have one high priority queue/class that have higher priority over the
other classes,
> probably we can do this now but it is not made as exception i.e. depends
from
> your setup, what other classes do u have...etc...
>
> My idea is to have an exception for this super class with shortened
"network-path",
> so that we get lower possible delays.. i thik in cisco they called it
priority-queue
>
> Is such thing feasable or it can be acomplished with current qdiscs and
> work even under heavy load with thousand of classes...
>
>
> tia
>
> _______________________________________________
> LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
> http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/