Hello Patrick, I read the abstract and introduction to original H-FSC paper. I believe it was mostly about decoupling bw and delay. It seems to me HTB does this well. When and/or why would I would want to use H-FSC versus HTB or are they direct competitors? Curious, Torsten -----Original Message----- From: Patrick McHardy [mailto:kaber@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2003 10:05 AM To: lartc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: beta-release of H-FSC port for Linux 2.6 I've done a port of the altq H-FSC packet scheduler for linux 2.6. It's still in beta stage but it's running for about two weeks here without problems (and excellent shaping results). There is no documentation, so it's at best for the playful at the moment. The patches are available at http://trash.net/~kaber/hfsc If you are looking for 2.4 patches, there are none at the moment but it's a 5 minute effort so if you need them please ask. Please note due to a lack of time I will only answer basic usage questions at this point and for sure I won't review tc scripts without detailed bug reports. Have Fun, Patrick BTW: on a related issue, IMQ is looking for a new maintainer. If you are interested please contact me. _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
