From owner-freebsd-net Sun Mar 7 18:58: 3 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from widefw.csl.sony.co.jp (widefw.csl.sony.co.jp [133.138.1.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8543C14D9E for ; Sun, 7 Mar 1999 18:58:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kjc@csl.sony.co.jp) Received: from hotaka.csl.sony.co.jp (root@hotaka.csl.sony.co.jp [43.27.98.57]) by widefw.csl.sony.co.jp (8.8.8/3.6W) with ESMTP id LAA19055; Mon, 8 Mar 1999 11:57:41 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (kjc@[127.0.0.1]) by hotaka.csl.sony.co.jp (8.8.8/3.6W/hotaka/98122515) with ESMTP id LAA21793; Mon, 8 Mar 1999 11:57:40 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199903080257.LAA21793@hotaka.csl.sony.co.jp> To: Andreas Klemm Cc: julian@whistle.com, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ALTQ 1.1.3, support for FreeBSD 3.1-STABLE, started the work In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 07 Mar 1999 14:26:18 +0100." <19990307142618.A4807@titan.klemm.gtn.com> Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1999 11:57:40 +0900 From: Kenjiro Cho Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Andreas, >> I started to port your ALTQ 1.1.3 patches for FreeBSD 3.0 >> to FreeBSD-3.1. The ALTQ patch for FreeBSD-3.1-RELEASE is already available from http://www.csl.sony.co.jp/person/kjc/software.html >> BTW, just curious, did you or somebody else play with WFQ ? >> The authors say in the docu, WFQ isn't well maintained and >> is missing hashing ... Do you thing using ALTQ brings advantages >> like Cisco's implementation does ? All I want is, to get better >> telnet / ssh performance over a 64 KBit ISDN line if UUCP/ftp >> sessions saturate the link. I believe that CBQ provides much better control over WFQ since WFQ is not capable of controlling the peak rate of a flow. See the following report by George Uhl at NASA. http://corn.eos.nasa.gov/qos/qos_results_summary_july98.html --Kenjiro To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message