Re: PRIO and TBF is much better than HTB??

Linux Advanced Routing and Traffic Control

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Simo wrote:

#define UPLOAD 1000kbps

I've never used tcns/sim if that's what this is kbps means k bytes to "normal" tc.


              $low = class{ tbf (rate 300kbps, burst 1510B, mtu 1510B, limit
3000B); }

limit 3000B - not even enough for two packets (1500 mtu = 1514 to tc on eth), would hurt performance on a real wan.

every 0.0008s send TCP_PCK($tcp_dport=22) 0 x 60

/* 800kbit/s  */

testing with a stream is not very representative of real tcp.


the delay by the combination of PRIO and TBF is much better than by the HTB.
(is it possible that pakets maybe dropped by the combination of PRIO and
TBF, that´s why the latency is so good???)

Yes unless you add leafs with limit htb uses qlen of nic, default 1000p

Andy.
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc

[Index of Archives]     [LARTC Home Page]     [Netfilter]     [Netfilter Development]     [Network Development]     [Bugtraq]     [GCC Help]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Fedora Users]
  Powered by Linux