unning spamassassin, and theres a lot of people who just dumps mail
flagged as spam.
--
Patrick Petersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
___
LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
etatesting too
if you need any.
> For us small bandwidth users a R(real)FQ would be nice - (e)sfq is OK
> but it often hashes into the same slot and perturb causes packet
> reordering which hurts more when used for ingress.
I will try fiddling without esfq with fingers crossed - thanks.
ther than esfq on dst which is
> going to effectively make many bittorrent connections go into a FIFO,
> which could make for more burstiness.
I'll make a note, but shouldnt esfq make things more or less fair no
matter how much traffic one client has over another?
--
Patric
efforts so far can be seen here:
http://tc.schmakk.dk/betashaper
--
Patrick Petersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
___
LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
. Would that be
better than using imq?
--
Patrick Petersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
___
LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
that my 2 root qdiscs are delaying packets a lot.
According to tc -s qdisc etc etc about 100-500 packets are overlimits,
even when dataflow is no more than around 5-10kb/s. Setting a ceil on
the root classes seems to help it out a little, but not completely. This
i dont understand.
--
Patrick Petersen <
ks into the packet stream and
where it is put back in? Im thinking the packets should go out through
imq at the iptables rule, but i think im wrong.
--
Patrick Petersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
___
LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman
any recommendations?
Also, if you have the time, a look through my script is much appreciated.
(Im concerned about the calculations for dividing the bandwidth, the
general setup of everything and the ipp2p+connmark tagging.)
--
Patrick Petersen <[EMAIL PROTEC
