Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 23 Nov 2000 05:02:32 -0800
From:      Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
To:        Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com>
Cc:        net@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: ALTQ as standard.....
Message-ID:  <3A1D1567.7D4A6F87@elischer.org>
References:  <Pine.BSO.4.10.10011210929060.519-100000@spider.pilosoft.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alex Pilosov wrote:
> 
> Julian,
> 
> Can you take a look at the code http://www.riss-telecom.ru/~vitaly/
> 
thanks for the pointer...
I'll examine it in more depth later, (I looke at it some time ago)
I  was not specifically looking for ALTQ traffic controlling, but  the
ALTQ ability to have 'pluggable queue types'



> Its already based on netgraph, and it can do [almost] everything that ALTQ
> does. The only thing it lacks compared to altq is a large selection of
> queuing disciplines. It is also much faster than altq.
> 
> bwman also has support for lower and upper bound of bandwidth, unlike
> ALTQ.
> 

I will get back to you later about these modules....

> -alex
> 
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2000, Julian Elischer wrote:
> 
> > I'd like to put to the networking list that we take a serious look
> > at making the ALTQ code from Kenjiro Cho a standard part of FreeBSD.
> >
> > I'm looking at adding some queueing methods into Netgraph
> > as part of some work being discussed by
> > phk, Archie, Brian and myself, Looking into this I note that
> > for the to be really effective we really want to have an
> > overall queueing strategy for the OS. We have at the moment,
> > the simplistic IFQ_ macro's, but I think that they have lived
> > long enough and done their duty.
> > I'd like to replace them (or at least supplement them)
> > in a way that allows us to have more comprehensive queue
> > support. If done correctly, (e.g the correct macro's
> > are added,) I think we can keep the performance degradation
> > to a minimum.
> >
> > MY main reason right NOW is that in some cases, Netgraph
> > interfaces to exisiting code using the exisiting queues, and
> > if I want to add such things as queue priorities, I can't
> > do this unless the exisiting code also upgrades.
> > (e.g. the netgraph ethernet hooks deliver packets into the
> > same queue that the normal interface methods do.)
> >
> > Julian
> >
> >
> >

\
-- 
      __--_|\  Julian Elischer
     /       \ julian@elischer.org
    (   OZ    ) World tour 2000
---> X_.---._/  presently in:  Budapest
            v




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?3A1D1567.7D4A6F87>