[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070322134552.M83364@visp.net.lb>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 15:47:54 +0200
From: "Denys" <denys@...p.net.lb>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Cc: Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: iproute2-2.6.20-070313 bug ?
Hi again
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 14:43:43 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote
> Denys wrote:
> >>>Another thing, it is working well
> >>>with old tc. Just really if i have plenty of RAM's and i want 32second
> >>>buffer, why i cannot have that, and if i see it is really possible
before?
> >>
> >>I know it worked before. But I can't think of a reason why anyone
> >>would want a buffer that large. Why do you want to queue packets
> >>for up to 64 seconds?
> >
> > Seems i misunderstand how it works. If i am not wrong, till buffer
available,
> > bandwidth will be given on "peakrate" speed, and when buffer is empty -
on
> > "rate" speed. I am wrong?
>
> No, I got confused, sorry about that. Your configuration allows
> bursts up to 64 seconds long. I guess there's nothing wrong with that.
>
> I already asked Stephen to revert that patch, it was not meant to
> be included yet, unfortunately it made it into the release. Even
> more unfortunate is that it looks like we need larger types in the
> ABI to properly support nano-second resolution.
Thanks sir for your great help and great software and sorry that i took time,
by not enough good explanation.
--
Virtual ISP S.A.L.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists