> I need the low-latency class for games (CounterStrike), so I can't afford > to drop any packets (I guess). On the other hand it typically doesn't use > too much bandwidth, so it can lend the rest. > > I had read devik's manual (I've read a lot on htb stuff, but I can't claim > to remember it all, let alone put it in practise) but I don't see you > statement "A lower prio is good for delays IF the class with the lower prio > never sends more then it's rate (so it's never overlimited)." in it. In > fact, it says that the higher prio class gets "excess bandwidth first", > which is what I want. http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/qos/htb/manual/userg.htm#prio At the end of the paragraph, Devik did some tests. He gave www lower prio and yes, the delays are very low. But www is never sending more then the rate. At point 7, he starts sending more data to the www class then the configured rate. And see what happens, the www delay increases a lot (blue line) and the delay of the other classes drops nearly to zero (yellow line). > But you are probably right that my solution is way too crude for practical > purposes. Maybe I should only be using prio for the game-packets and put > all other classes in the same prio (which is also mentioned at devik's > site). If it works, why changing ?? > Like I suspected, my current script is very basic, I need quite some more > work on it. > > Anyway, thanks again Stef, you're doing a great job! No problem. Stef -- stef.coene@docum.org "Using Linux as bandwidth manager" http://www.docum.org/ #lartc @ irc.oftc.net _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
