> E.g. you might have a customer agency which needs say 256 kbps for its > headquarters and 64 kbps for its factory. They pay for 512 kbps which > means that they buy 512-256-64=192 kbps of "excess" bw available to both > sites on demand. Well, it makes sense to me that they would be worried > about the "headquarters" class draining the other class in case both > classes have demand. They might want to say "We buy lower rate for our > factory because Internet access is rarely needed there. But *when* it > *is* needed we want to let the factory take at least 1/2 of the "excess" > bw we buy even if headquarters demand excess bw too. We already buy 256 well, you are right. However you should take into account that even in cbq the weight is not precise argument. It influences excess distribution but you will see some discrepancies. The idea is nice - only implementation is a bit more complex ;) As I'm working on new version I'll try to do it - if it will not slow things down. It is because with assmption that "weight" is proportional to rate we can make some algorithms faster ... We will see ;) devik
