In wireless networks it can be handy to shape by packet rate
rather than bytes/s (because capacity is packet-rate-limited).
Has anyone done any work on packet-rate shaping ?
Thanks.
___
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
On 5 Okt 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In wireless networks it can be handy to shape by packet rate
rather than bytes/s (because capacity is packet-rate-limited).
Has anyone done any work on packet-rate shaping ?
Don't know any wireless details. But I guess in the end it is very
similar to
skip /
Has anyone done any work on packet-rate shaping ?
iptables: limit, hashlimit, dstlimit work on pps basis.
--
Peter V. Saveliev
___
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
Peter V. Saveliev wrote:
skip /
Has anyone done any work on packet-rate shaping ?
iptables: limit, hashlimit, dstlimit work on pps basis.
doh ! yes, I'd thought about that stuff but somehow
discounted it as 'not worthy' for traffic shaping.
Thanks.
David Boreham wrote:
iptables: limit, hashlimit, dstlimit work on pps basis.
doh ! yes, I'd thought about that stuff but somehow
discounted it as 'not worthy' for traffic shaping.
Actually, I remember now why iptables doesn't work :
All it does is drop the excess packets over the limit.
В сообщении от Saturday 06 October 2007 05:16:38 David Boreham написал(а):
David Boreham wrote:
iptables: limit, hashlimit, dstlimit work on pps basis.
doh ! yes, I'd thought about that stuff but somehow
discounted it as 'not worthy' for traffic shaping.
Actually, I remember now why
Peter V. Saveliev wrote:
skip /
Simple packet drop works for ordinary tcp congestion algorithms as a channel
overload, and tcp decreases speed. So works RED policing filters and so on.
Well...red isn't exactly 'simple' packet drop :)
In fact, if I could combine packet-rate-limit with red
