From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Zhu Yi Subject: RE: [PATCH] IPROUTE: Modify tc for new PRIO multiqueue behavior Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 11:02:20 +0800 Message-ID: <1178766140.3045.24.camel@debian.sh.intel.com> References: <1178666902.4055.28.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" , Johannes Berg , Stephen Hemminger , Patrick McHardy , netdev@vger.kernel.org, jgarzik@pobox.com, cramerj , "Kok, Auke-jan H" , "Leech, Christopher" , davem@davemloft.net To: hadi@cyberus.ca Return-path: Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:54354 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752844AbXEJDCU (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2007 23:02:20 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1178666902.4055.28.camel@localhost> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 19:28 -0400, jamal wrote: > Wireless with CSMA/CA is a slightly different beast due to the shared > channels; its worse but not very different in nature than the case > where you have a shared ethernet hub (CSMA/CD) and you keep adding > hosts to it The difference is the hub provides the same transmission chance for all the packets but in wireless, high priority packets will block low priority packets transmission. You can argue there is still chances a low priority packet is sent first before a high priority one. But this is not the point of wireless QoS. It rarely happens and should be avoid at best effort in the implementation. Thanks, -yi