Re: Some more test on ingress, ifb, fwmark

Linux Advanced Routing and Traffic Control

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

 



Marco Gaiarin wrote:
Mandi! Andy Furniss
   In chel di` si favelave...

for the tx buffer, you mean that ''doesn't bother'', or i've to set
accordingly the sfq buffer with the 'limit' paremeter?
But i don't define a sfq for the parent, i've to setup the limit
parameter for every children?
Setting it as you did is probably OK, I was just pointing out that
lengths of the sfqs would be sfqs default and not that.

Ok. Apply the same ''bufferbloat'' rule, eg, as low as possible?
Or setting (with limit) the queue on sfqs too low can be dangerous?

I would leave sfq at default, too low would be bad.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lartc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


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