Re: HFSC and that ATM overhead problem (Another VOIP QoS post. Ahhhh)

Linux Advanced Routing and Traffic Control

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

 



On Sunday 04 November 2007 23:16, Fog_Watch wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Nov 2007 12:46:37 +0000
>
> Gustavo Homem <gustavo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I don't use Shorewall, but rather an iptables script which works for
> > most scenarios:
>
> No disrespect, but that sounds too scary for me.  I feel more
> comfortable if something like Shorewall is holding my hand.

Takes more time the first time and less time from then on.

>
> > That is, start with the value the modem is synchronized for, fill the
> > line with the average traffic you expect and lower the values until
> > is OK. As you lower the upstream value you will find increasingly
> > better latency values (try with ping + voip app).
>
> Thanks for the explanation.
>
> > doesn't scale for using across multiple systems of
> > different versions.
>
> I didn't understand that bit.  What are the "systems" and "versions"?
>

If you manage multiple Linux systems with different versions you realize that 
patching the kernels for all, and retesting afterwards, takes quite some 
time. Then if you need a kernel upgrade, there you go again praying that the 
patches work.

The point was: the gain obtained from using those patches might not compensate 
the time investment, on the scenarios I work with.

For a single setup, or multiple identical ones, it will pay off for sure.

Cheers
Gustavo

> Regards
>
> Fog_Watch.

-- 
Angulo Sólido - Tecnologias de Informação
http://angulosolido.pt
_______________________________________________
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