On Sun, 22 May 2005 18:51:36 +0100 Andy Furniss <andy.furniss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >You could aswell as wrr consider esfq - you can only roughly divide what >bandwidth you have, but the advantage over wrr is that you can choose a >queue length for your link speed. ESFQ is good, but isn't a panacea. You still can use esfq as a queueing discipline for wrr's subclasses. In fact it's a perfect match, because you have both fair division among sources AND among the connections made from the same IP. >I don't think you can di it with wrr and if you are shaping download >from the internet it could be better. You don't have to do this directly with WRR, but you can do it with HTB "above" WRR. As for download, you can use IMQ. Check out Route Hat's tc script. I was able to reach fair internet bandwidth division for a peak of 700 users on a 8MBit line. Of course heavy P2P users complained, but casual users were happy and so were the gamers, because they had low latency with low but sustained transfer rate. >Andy. Yours sincerely, shurdeek _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
