From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Jan 15 17:44:55 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id RAA16387
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 17:44:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from awfulhak.demon.co.uk (awfulhak.demon.co.uk [158.152.17.1])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id RAA16380
          for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 17:44:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from awfulhak.demon.co.uk (localhost.coverform.lan [127.0.0.1]) by awfulhak.demon.co.uk (8.8.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA15211; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 01:43:01 GMT
Message-Id: <199701160143.BAA15211@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 8/22/96
To: Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com>
cc: julian@whistle.com, danny@panda.hilink.com.au, ejs@bfd.com,
        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, archie@alpo.whistle.com
Subject: Re: FreeBSD as an ISDN Router 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 15 Jan 1997 16:59:18 PST."
             <199701160059.QAA23303@bubba.whistle.com> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 01:43:00 +0000
From: Brian Somers <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

[.....]
> > Do you mean that mpd isn't configurable as a single-line ppp daemon ?
> > I was thinking along the lines of it being a user-land ppp that can sit
> > on a variable number of serial lines.
> 
> No, what I meant was that mpd doesn't have Charles Mott's alias stuff in it.

So if the alias stuff was merged, it would be a good replacement for 
/usr/src/usr.sbin/ppp ?  I don't mind which way around the merge is done...
Armed with this sort of beast, it'll be interesting trying to get my ISP to 
co-operate and give me a twice-the bandwidth-for-twice-the-price deal ;)

> > BTW, how does mpd do its load balancing ?  Does it just send packets to
> > the interface with the smallest buffer queue ?
> 
> No, it uses a fairly simple strategy whose goal is to make all of the
> packet fragments arrive on the other end of the link(s) at the same time.
> It computes this based on user inputted values for latency and bandwidth.
> This optimizes for both total bandwidth and total latency.

This would be a convenient way to test that the alias stuff deals with out-of-order fragments properly too (this hasn't been tested properly 'cos we can't easily create the environment) :)

So, are there any objections to this (merging) ?

-- 
Brian <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>, <brian@freebsd.org>
      <http://www.awfulhak.demon.co.uk/>
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour....