* [LARTC] AF
@ 2001-05-08 2:47 Tzeh Yeu Leang
2001-05-11 2:26 ` Tzeh Yeu Leang
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Tzeh Yeu Leang @ 2001-05-08 2:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lartc
Hi all,
Currently, I am experimenting with the example script afcbq and i have
some problem here. Any helps is greatly appreciated. Here are part of my
scripts (i didn't show the setup for AF class 2,3 and 4, but they are
similar to setup of class 1):
# --- General setup ---
tc qdisc add dev eth1 handle 1:0 root dsmark indices 64 set_tc_index
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 tcindex mask 0xfc shift
2 pass_on
tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 1:0 handle 2:0 cbq bandwidth 10Mbit cell 8
avpkt 1000 mpu 64
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 2:0 protocol ip prio 1 tcindex mask 0xf0 shift
4 pass_on
# --- AF Class 1 specific setup---
tc class add dev eth1 parent 2:0 classid 2:1 cbq bandwidth 10Mbit rate 2Mbit
avpkt 1000 prio 1 bounded allot 1514 weight 1 maxburst 21
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 2:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 1 tcindex
classid 2:1
tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 2:1 gred setup DPs 3 default 2
# --- AF Class 1 DP 1---
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 10 tcindex
classid 1:111
tc qdisc change dev eth1 parent 2:1 gred limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB burst
20 avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit DP 1 \
probability 0.02 prio 2
# --- AF Class 1 DP 2---
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 12 tcindex
classid 1:112
tc qdisc change dev eth1 parent 2:1 gred limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB burst
20 avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit DP 2 \
probability 0.04 prio 3
# --- AF Class 1 DP 3---
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 14 tcindex
classid 1:113
tc qdisc change dev eth1 parent 2:1 gred limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB burst
20 avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit DP 3 \
probability 0.06 prio 4
#------BE Queue setup------
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 2 handle 0 tcindex mask 0
classid 1:1
tc class add dev eth1 parent 2:0 classid 2:5 cbq bandwidth 100Mbit rate
2Mbit avpkt 1000 prio 8 bounded allot 1514 weight 1 maxburst 21
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 2:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 0 tcindex
classid 2:5
tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 2:5 red limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB burst 20
avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit probability 0.4
##########################
Here are part of what i get when i "tc -s qdisc":
qdisc red 8005: dev eth1 limit 60Kb min 15Kb max 45Kb
Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0)
marked 0 early 0qdisc gred 8001: dev eth1
DP:1 (prio 8) Average Queue 0b Measured Queue 0b
Packet drops: 0 (forced 0 early 0)
Packet totals: 0 (bytes 0) ewma 3 Plog 21 Scell_log 9
DP:2 (prio 8) Average Queue 0b Measured Queue 0b
Packet drops: 0 (forced 0 early 0)
Packet totals: 0 (bytes 0) ewma 3 Plog 20 Scell_log 9
DP:3 (prio 8) Average Queue 0b Measured Queue 0b
Packet drops: 0 (forced 0 early 0)
Packet totals: 0 (bytes 0) ewma 3 Plog 19 Scell_log 9
Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0)
qdisc cbq 2: dev eth1 rate 10Mbit (bounded,isolated) prio no-transmit
Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0)
borrowed 0 overactions 0 avgidle 624 undertime 0
qdisc dsmark 1: dev eth1 indices 0x0040 set_tc_index
Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0)
pdrop 0 other 0
#####################
my question is why is the prio shown is always 8, although i set them to
prio 2,3,4 respectively? And i suspect because of this, i actually get
better performance for BE (in terms of lower delay).
Also, i would like to clarify some requirement for af as proosed in RFC. In
"Appendix: Example services" of RFC 2597, it said that AF1x should have
"greater probability for timely forwarding by having lighter load".
Therefore, i send lighter traffic to class 1, than class 2 and 3. But still
i get lower delay for class BE, and no observable difference in delay for
class 1, 2 and 3 (maybe it is the prio 8 problem as described above).
What do you guys think about the delay for AF as proposed in RFC? Should AF
class 1 has the smallest delay compared to class 2,3 4 and BE?
Last question, what do we do with excess AF traffic? Do we drop it or
downgrade it to BE?
If you have read to this part, i must thank you for your patience.
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [LARTC] AF
2001-05-08 2:47 [LARTC] AF Tzeh Yeu Leang
@ 2001-05-11 2:26 ` Tzeh Yeu Leang
2001-05-14 6:43 ` Juergen
2001-05-14 17:06 ` Rodrigo Goya
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Tzeh Yeu Leang @ 2001-05-11 2:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lartc
Hi all,
I am trying out the example script afcbq. I tried to set different prio
to the 3 DPs, but it always shows the default value(which is 8). Can anyone
who has experimented with AF before point out where is my mistake?? Thanks.
# --- General setup ---
tc qdisc add dev eth1 handle 1:0 root dsmark indices 64 set_tc_index
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 tcindex mask 0xfc shift
2 pass_on
tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 1:0 handle 2:0 cbq bandwidth 100Mbit cell 8
avpkt 1000 mpu 64
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 2:0 protocol ip prio 1 tcindex mask 0xf0 shift
4 pass_on
# --- AF Class 1 specific setup---
tc class add dev eth1 parent 2:0 classid 2:1 cbq bandwidth 100Mbit rate
2Mbit avpkt 1000 prio 1 bounded allot 1514 weight 1 maxburst 21
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 2:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 1 tcindex
classid 2:1
tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 2:1 gred setup DPs 3 default 2
# --- AF Class 1 DP 1---
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 10 tcindex
classid 1:111
tc qdisc change dev eth1 parent 2:1 gred limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB burst
20 avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit DP 1 probability 0.02 prio 2
# --- AF Class 1 DP 2---
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 12 tcindex
classid 1:112
tc qdisc change dev eth1 parent 2:1 gred limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB burst
20 avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit DP 2 probability 0.04 prio 3
# --- AF Class 1 DP 3---
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 14 tcindex
classid 1:113
tc qdisc change dev eth1 parent 2:1 gred limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB burst
20 avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit DP 3 probability 0.06 prio 4
# --- AF Class 2 specific setup---
tc class add dev eth1 parent 2:0 classid 2:2 cbq bandwidth 100Mbit rate
2Mbit avpkt 1000 prio 2 bounded allot 1514 weight 1 maxburst 21
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 2:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 2 tcindex
classid 2:2
tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 2:2 gred setup DPs 3 default 2
# --- AF Class 2 DP 1---
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 18 tcindex
classid 1:121
tc qdisc change dev eth1 parent 2:2 gred limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB burst
20 avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit DP 1 probability 0.02 prio 2
# --- AF Class 2 DP 2---
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 20 tcindex
classid 1:122
tc qdisc change dev eth1 parent 2:2 gred limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB burst
20 avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit DP 2 probability 0.04 prio 3
# --- AF Class 2 DP 3---
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 22 tcindex
classid 1:123
tc qdisc change dev eth1 parent 2:2 gred limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB burst
20 avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit DP 3 probability 0.06 prio 4
#------BE Queue setup------
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 2 handle 0 tcindex mask 0
classid 1:1
tc class add dev eth1 parent 2:0 classid 2:5 cbq bandwidth 100Mbit rate
2Mbit avpkt 1000 prio 8 bounded allot 1514 weight 1 maxburst 21
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 2:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 0 tcindex
classid 2:5
tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 2:5 red limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB burst 20
avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit probability 0.4
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [LARTC] AF
2001-05-08 2:47 [LARTC] AF Tzeh Yeu Leang
2001-05-11 2:26 ` Tzeh Yeu Leang
@ 2001-05-14 6:43 ` Juergen
2001-05-14 17:06 ` Rodrigo Goya
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Juergen @ 2001-05-14 6:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lartc
Sorry, I want to do your test but something wrong!!!!!!
tc qdisc add dev eth1 handle 1:0 root dsmark indices 64 set_tc_index
[root@altqtest linux-2.4]# tc qdisc add dev eth1 handle 1:0 root dsmark
indices 64 set_tc_index
Unknown qdisc "dsmark", hence option "indices" is unparsable
My kernel is 2.4.2 and iproute is 2.2.4-10
I have checked my kernel, and it support field marker.
<M> Diffserv field marker
Please give me some advice...
thx...
> # --- General setup ---
> tc qdisc add dev eth1 handle 1:0 root dsmark indices 64 set_tc_index
> tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 tcindex mask 0xfc
shift
> 2 pass_on
> tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 1:0 handle 2:0 cbq bandwidth 10Mbit cell 8
> avpkt 1000 mpu 64
> tc filter add dev eth1 parent 2:0 protocol ip prio 1 tcindex mask 0xf0
shift
> 4 pass_on
>
> # --- AF Class 1 specific setup---
> tc class add dev eth1 parent 2:0 classid 2:1 cbq bandwidth 10Mbit rate
2Mbit
> avpkt 1000 prio 1 bounded allot 1514 weight 1 maxburst 21
> tc filter add dev eth1 parent 2:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 1 tcindex
> classid 2:1
> tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 2:1 gred setup DPs 3 default 2
>
> # --- AF Class 1 DP 1---
> tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 10 tcindex
> classid 1:111
> tc qdisc change dev eth1 parent 2:1 gred limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB
burst
> 20 avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit DP 1 \
> probability 0.02 prio 2
>
> # --- AF Class 1 DP 2---
> tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 12 tcindex
> classid 1:112
> tc qdisc change dev eth1 parent 2:1 gred limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB
burst
> 20 avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit DP 2 \
> probability 0.04 prio 3
>
> # --- AF Class 1 DP 3---
> tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 14 tcindex
> classid 1:113
> tc qdisc change dev eth1 parent 2:1 gred limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB
burst
> 20 avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit DP 3 \
> probability 0.06 prio 4
>
> #------BE Queue setup------
> tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 2 handle 0 tcindex mask
0
> classid 1:1
> tc class add dev eth1 parent 2:0 classid 2:5 cbq bandwidth 100Mbit rate
> 2Mbit avpkt 1000 prio 8 bounded allot 1514 weight 1 maxburst 21
> tc filter add dev eth1 parent 2:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 0 tcindex
> classid 2:5
> tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 2:5 red limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB burst 20
> avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit probability 0.4
>
> ##########################
> Here are part of what i get when i "tc -s qdisc":
> qdisc red 8005: dev eth1 limit 60Kb min 15Kb max 45Kb
> Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0)
> marked 0 early 0qdisc gred 8001: dev eth1
> DP:1 (prio 8) Average Queue 0b Measured Queue 0b
> Packet drops: 0 (forced 0 early 0)
> Packet totals: 0 (bytes 0) ewma 3 Plog 21 Scell_log 9
> DP:2 (prio 8) Average Queue 0b Measured Queue 0b
> Packet drops: 0 (forced 0 early 0)
> Packet totals: 0 (bytes 0) ewma 3 Plog 20 Scell_log 9
> DP:3 (prio 8) Average Queue 0b Measured Queue 0b
> Packet drops: 0 (forced 0 early 0)
> Packet totals: 0 (bytes 0) ewma 3 Plog 19 Scell_log 9
> Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0)
>
> qdisc cbq 2: dev eth1 rate 10Mbit (bounded,isolated) prio no-transmit
> Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0)
> borrowed 0 overactions 0 avgidle 624 undertime 0
>
> qdisc dsmark 1: dev eth1 indices 0x0040 set_tc_index
> Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0)
> pdrop 0 other 0
>
> #####################
>
> my question is why is the prio shown is always 8, although i set them to
> prio 2,3,4 respectively? And i suspect because of this, i actually get
> better performance for BE (in terms of lower delay).
>
> Also, i would like to clarify some requirement for af as proosed in RFC.
In
> "Appendix: Example services" of RFC 2597, it said that AF1x should have
> "greater probability for timely forwarding by having lighter load".
> Therefore, i send lighter traffic to class 1, than class 2 and 3. But
still
> i get lower delay for class BE, and no observable difference in delay for
> class 1, 2 and 3 (maybe it is the prio 8 problem as described above).
>
> What do you guys think about the delay for AF as proposed in RFC? Should
AF
> class 1 has the smallest delay compared to class 2,3 4 and BE?
>
> Last question, what do we do with excess AF traffic? Do we drop it or
> downgrade it to BE?
>
> If you have read to this part, i must thank you for your patience.
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
> http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO:
http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/
>
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [LARTC] AF
2001-05-08 2:47 [LARTC] AF Tzeh Yeu Leang
2001-05-11 2:26 ` Tzeh Yeu Leang
2001-05-14 6:43 ` Juergen
@ 2001-05-14 17:06 ` Rodrigo Goya
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Rodrigo Goya @ 2001-05-14 17:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lartc
Hi uergen,
In the iproute2 distro there is a file named "Config" with the following options in it:
TC_CONFIG_DIFFSERV=n
TC_CONFIG_ATM=n
Set the TC_CONFIG_DIFFSERV to y then compile tc again. Should work then.
Cheers,
Rodrigo
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 02:43:41PM +0800, Juergen wrote:
> Sorry, I want to do your test but something wrong!!!!!!
> tc qdisc add dev eth1 handle 1:0 root dsmark indices 64 set_tc_index
>
>
> [root@altqtest linux-2.4]# tc qdisc add dev eth1 handle 1:0 root dsmark
> indices 64 set_tc_index
> Unknown qdisc "dsmark", hence option "indices" is unparsable
>
> My kernel is 2.4.2 and iproute is 2.2.4-10
> I have checked my kernel, and it support field marker.
> <M> Diffserv field marker
>
> Please give me some advice...
> thx...
>
> > # --- General setup ---
> > tc qdisc add dev eth1 handle 1:0 root dsmark indices 64 set_tc_index
> > tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 tcindex mask 0xfc
> shift
> > 2 pass_on
> > tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 1:0 handle 2:0 cbq bandwidth 10Mbit cell 8
> > avpkt 1000 mpu 64
> > tc filter add dev eth1 parent 2:0 protocol ip prio 1 tcindex mask 0xf0
> shift
> > 4 pass_on
> >
> > # --- AF Class 1 specific setup---
> > tc class add dev eth1 parent 2:0 classid 2:1 cbq bandwidth 10Mbit rate
> 2Mbit
> > avpkt 1000 prio 1 bounded allot 1514 weight 1 maxburst 21
> > tc filter add dev eth1 parent 2:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 1 tcindex
> > classid 2:1
> > tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 2:1 gred setup DPs 3 default 2
> >
> > # --- AF Class 1 DP 1---
> > tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 10 tcindex
> > classid 1:111
> > tc qdisc change dev eth1 parent 2:1 gred limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB
> burst
> > 20 avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit DP 1 \
> > probability 0.02 prio 2
> >
> > # --- AF Class 1 DP 2---
> > tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 12 tcindex
> > classid 1:112
> > tc qdisc change dev eth1 parent 2:1 gred limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB
> burst
> > 20 avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit DP 2 \
> > probability 0.04 prio 3
> >
> > # --- AF Class 1 DP 3---
> > tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 14 tcindex
> > classid 1:113
> > tc qdisc change dev eth1 parent 2:1 gred limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB
> burst
> > 20 avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit DP 3 \
> > probability 0.06 prio 4
> >
> > #------BE Queue setup------
> > tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 2 handle 0 tcindex mask
> 0
> > classid 1:1
> > tc class add dev eth1 parent 2:0 classid 2:5 cbq bandwidth 100Mbit rate
> > 2Mbit avpkt 1000 prio 8 bounded allot 1514 weight 1 maxburst 21
> > tc filter add dev eth1 parent 2:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 0 tcindex
> > classid 2:5
> > tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 2:5 red limit 60KB min 15KB max 45KB burst 20
> > avpkt 1000 bandwidth 10Mbit probability 0.4
> >
> > ##########################
> > Here are part of what i get when i "tc -s qdisc":
> > qdisc red 8005: dev eth1 limit 60Kb min 15Kb max 45Kb
> > Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0)
> > marked 0 early 0qdisc gred 8001: dev eth1
> > DP:1 (prio 8) Average Queue 0b Measured Queue 0b
> > Packet drops: 0 (forced 0 early 0)
> > Packet totals: 0 (bytes 0) ewma 3 Plog 21 Scell_log 9
> > DP:2 (prio 8) Average Queue 0b Measured Queue 0b
> > Packet drops: 0 (forced 0 early 0)
> > Packet totals: 0 (bytes 0) ewma 3 Plog 20 Scell_log 9
> > DP:3 (prio 8) Average Queue 0b Measured Queue 0b
> > Packet drops: 0 (forced 0 early 0)
> > Packet totals: 0 (bytes 0) ewma 3 Plog 19 Scell_log 9
> > Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0)
> >
> > qdisc cbq 2: dev eth1 rate 10Mbit (bounded,isolated) prio no-transmit
> > Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0)
> > borrowed 0 overactions 0 avgidle 624 undertime 0
> >
> > qdisc dsmark 1: dev eth1 indices 0x0040 set_tc_index
> > Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0)
> > pdrop 0 other 0
> >
> > #####################
> >
> > my question is why is the prio shown is always 8, although i set them to
> > prio 2,3,4 respectively? And i suspect because of this, i actually get
> > better performance for BE (in terms of lower delay).
> >
> > Also, i would like to clarify some requirement for af as proosed in RFC.
> In
> > "Appendix: Example services" of RFC 2597, it said that AF1x should have
> > "greater probability for timely forwarding by having lighter load".
> > Therefore, i send lighter traffic to class 1, than class 2 and 3. But
> still
> > i get lower delay for class BE, and no observable difference in delay for
> > class 1, 2 and 3 (maybe it is the prio 8 problem as described above).
> >
> > What do you guys think about the delay for AF as proposed in RFC? Should
> AF
> > class 1 has the smallest delay compared to class 2,3 4 and BE?
> >
> > Last question, what do we do with excess AF traffic? Do we drop it or
> > downgrade it to BE?
> >
> > If you have read to this part, i must thank you for your patience.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
> > http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO:
> http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
> http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2001-05-14 17:06 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2001-05-08 2:47 [LARTC] AF Tzeh Yeu Leang
2001-05-11 2:26 ` Tzeh Yeu Leang
2001-05-14 6:43 ` Juergen
2001-05-14 17:06 ` Rodrigo Goya
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.