From: "Vladimir B. Savkin" <master@sectorb.msk.ru>
To: jamal <hadi@cyberus.ca>
Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] IMQ port to 2.6
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2004 00:32:37 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040131213236.GA3451@usr.lcm.msu.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1075584318.1033.159.camel@jzny.localdomain>
> Ok, i think i have understood you finally;->
> The challenge is in this one direction whose characteristics can be
> described as follows:
In other direction, the goal is the same, but IMQ is not needed,
since there is only one Internet link.
> a) Incoming pipe (from internet) is smaller than outgoing pipe (to
> clients).
Yes, and artificial limit is even smaller.
> b) Desire is to have excess bwidth with max fairness to all flows
> instead of free-for-all scheme.
Yes, if you define "flow" as all traffic to one client.
Actually, I use two-level hierarchy: in every flow in above sense
each micro-flow receives a fair amount of bandwidth (approximatly,
using sfq).
> [This can only be achieved by a non-work conserving scheduler].
Yes.
>
> Is the above correct?
>
It seems so :)
~
:wq
With best regards,
Vladimir Savkin.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-31 21:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-01-25 15:24 [RFC/PATCH] IMQ port to 2.6 Marcel Sebek
2004-01-25 16:44 ` Tomas Szepe
2004-01-25 19:22 ` jamal
2004-01-25 20:21 ` Vladimir B. Savkin
2004-01-25 23:45 ` jamal
2004-01-26 0:11 ` Vladimir B. Savkin
2004-01-26 3:09 ` jamal
2004-01-26 9:32 ` Vladimir B. Savkin
2004-01-26 13:38 ` jamal
2004-01-26 13:55 ` Vladimir B. Savkin
2004-01-26 14:29 ` jamal
2004-01-26 17:41 ` Vladimir B. Savkin
2004-01-27 3:25 ` jamal
2004-01-31 18:52 ` Vladimir B. Savkin
2004-01-31 20:26 ` jamal
2004-01-31 20:53 ` Vladimir B. Savkin
2004-01-31 21:25 ` jamal
2004-01-31 21:32 ` Vladimir B. Savkin [this message]
2004-01-31 21:49 ` jamal
2004-01-31 21:58 ` Vladimir B. Savkin
2004-01-31 22:26 ` jamal
2004-04-11 19:32 ` (Long) ANNOUNCE: IMQ replacement WAS(Re: " jamal
2004-01-26 15:24 ` Tomas Szepe
2004-01-27 3:14 ` jamal
2004-01-27 11:59 ` Tomas Szepe
2004-01-31 17:02 ` jamal
2004-01-25 19:25 ` David S. Miller
2004-01-25 20:23 ` Patrick McHardy
2004-01-25 21:55 ` David S. Miller
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=20040131213236.GA3451@usr.lcm.msu.ru \
--to=master@sectorb.msk.ru \
--cc=hadi@cyberus.ca \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).