jamal wrote: > You are still speaking ATM (and the above may still be valid), but: > Could you for example look at the netdevice->type and from that figure > out the link layer overhead and compensate for it. > Obviously a lot more useful if such activity is doable in user space > without any knowledge of the kernel? and therefore zero change to the > kernel and everything then becomes forward and backward compatible. It would be nice to have support for HFSC as well, which unfortunately needs to be done in the kernel since it doesn't use rate tables. What about qdiscs like SFQ (which uses the packet size in quantum calculations)? I guess it would make sense to use the wire-length there as well. _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
