[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <DF05DAC3-CED7-4615-AC02-F097EEC27752@inf-net.nl>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 18:18:44 +0200
From: Teco Boot <teco@...-net.nl>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
Ferry Huberts <mailings@...ie.com>,
Netem <netem@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"core-users@...itd.nrl.navy.mil" <core-users@...itd.nrl.navy.mil>
Subject: Re: netem: the reorder discussion
Op 23 aug. 2013 om 18:03 heeft Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> het volgende geschreven:
> On Fri, 2013-08-23 at 17:53 +0200, Teco Boot wrote:
>
>> Questions that pops out of of my head: What is more important,
>> understandable configuration or keep existing behavior for unmodified
>> configuration? Do we want to reorder, even with configured rate?
>>
>> My preference: make in understandable, document well and make all
>> sensible options available.
>
> The day 'rate' support was added, documentation became obsolete.
>
> Its actually hard to have both rate and delay + jitters + reorders or
> not.
>
> If you can fix this properly, patches are welcome, but I suspect you
> wanted to reintroduce the thing that made netem unusable for us.
No, for sure I do not want to make it unusable for you. Or anybody. The opposite is true.
I don't like the "look in souce" documentation. Or parameters with hard to understand side effects. --
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