From: Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com>
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [LARTC] 2.2 vs 2.4 for TC
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 00:46:56 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-lartc-99489891015157@msgid-missing> (raw)
Hi,
A while ago I saw a message saying that the TC features in 2.2 aren't
very mature, and I'm wondering what I'd be missing out on if I stayed
with 2.2 instead of using 2.4 now.
I'm quite familiar with ipchians, and advanced routing on 2.2. I
don't plan on doing any layer 2 based rules, so that's not an issue.
TIA,
Mike
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/
next reply other threads:[~2001-07-12 0:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-07-12 0:46 Mike Fedyk [this message]
2001-07-12 18:51 ` [LARTC] 2.2 vs 2.4 for TC Nikolai Vladychevski
2001-07-12 21:54 ` Mike Fedyk
2001-07-12 22:41 ` Nikolai Vladychevski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=marc-lartc-99489891015157@msgid-missing \
--to=mfedyk@matchmail.com \
--cc=lartc@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.