> Från: lartc-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:lartc-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]För bert hubert > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 03:25:37PM +0200, Daniel Bergqvist wrote: > > > This is basicly what I'm trying to do, but inside the sch_teql > driver. What > > is the problems with tunnels? > > If your link saturates and you get packetloss, you get very weird > performance problems. Also, one lost packet stops *all* your IP traffic > until it's resent. My idea is to have to devices, teql_send0 and teql_receive0. The teql_send0 is the old teql0 device, but it also adds a serial number and a new IP header so the packet goes to the teql_receive0 device at the remote end. I know that the packets will be sent in order on each ethernet link to the teql_receive0 device so it keeps a queue for each connection. If there is no packet loss only one queue that will have packets. If both queues have a packet it means we have a packet loss. The teql_receive0 device then sends the packets in the original order. > > > Where is the archive for netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx? > > It appears to have died. I'll forward you the right messages. I got it. Thanks! > Regards, > > bert hubert Regards, Daniel
