Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 12:25:21 +0900 From: Kenjiro Cho <kjc@csl.sony.co.jp> To: Joko Y <jky@itb.ac.id> Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ALTQ 1.1.3, support for FreeBSD 3.1-STABLE, started the work Message-ID: <199903090325.MAA27488@hotaka.csl.sony.co.jp> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 08 Mar 1999 20:11:17 %2B0700." <Pine.BSF.4.01.9903082007570.1513-100000@IPv6.ITB.ac.id>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> Mr. Cho, what do you think about W2FQ? I found it in URL below: >> http://www.cs.cmu.edu/People/hzhang/ As I understand it, WF2Q has evolved a lot since then. WF2Q --> WF2Q+ --> H-WF2Q+ --> H-FSC H-FSC is more theoretical than CBQ and has nice properties. You can find a comparison of H-FSC and CBQ in their SIGCOMM97 paper. Actually, I'm going to visit CMU this week to learn more from Hui Zhang. --Kenjiro To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199903090325.MAA27488>