From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 14 01:08:37 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33CC116A41C for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2005 01:08:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) Received: from cain.gsoft.com.au (cain.gsoft.com.au [203.31.81.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F24143D49 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2005 01:08:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) Received: from inchoate.gsoft.com.au (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by cain.gsoft.com.au (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j5E18Fxb003216; Tue, 14 Jun 2005 10:38:16 +0930 (CST) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) From: "Daniel O'Connor" To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 10:38:11 +0930 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <42ADD249.7020709@dnainternet.net> <42ADD3D5.6080103@offmyserver.com> <20050613204416.GJ30017@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> In-Reply-To: <20050613204416.GJ30017@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1365293.5FHxlCvz8t"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200506141038.12034.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> X-Spam-Score: -2.4 () ALL_TRUSTED X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.51 on 203.31.81.10 Cc: Baldur Gislason , Jeremie Le Hen , "Devon H. O'Dell" Subject: Re: prioritizing small ip packets? X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 01:08:37 -0000 --nextPart1365293.5FHxlCvz8t Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 06:14, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: > This is true, prioritizing ACKs is very useful when you want to download > with full speed while uploading. But I tend to agree with Baldur's idea > too : I give HTTP and DNS requests as well as interactive SSH session > (TOS field set to "low delay") a heavy weight in order to have them > practically unaffected by a big mail delivery or a scp. There is still a problem whereby a large packet in transit can't be=20 interrupted by a smaller packet. One solution I saw for this when doing VoIP over ADSL was using PPPoE and=20 setting it up for multi-link over one link. The packets get fragmented into= =20 smaller pieces and the fragments of smaller packets get higher priorities. Not sure how much over head it cost, but ISTR it wasn't too bad. =2D-=20 Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C --nextPart1365293.5FHxlCvz8t Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBCri385ZPcIHs/zowRAlWsAJ4o+rHIG7OLn30dz3tcGF8Bvc45wQCfbN/X Lx+rY29F5o2vOY6yxA26xIE= =C5MR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1365293.5FHxlCvz8t--