On 9/12/10 9:57 AM, Brian J. Murrell wrote: > > So in doing a test, it doesn't seem to be having the desired > effect. :-( > > 35 packets transmitted, 35 received, 0% packet loss, time 34003ms > rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 5.974/408.201/666.489/194.407 ms > > where the transfer was done during ping packets 4-34, which account for > the high average and max RTT.
Yep, I saw the same thing. At which point I concluded that 100% line utilization is bad for latency, even if packets are prioritized on the sending end. As I've said, I don't see a way to enforce a single bandwidth limit while doing effective priority queuing. -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ When I die, I want to go like my Grandfather who Shoreline, \ died peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming like Washington, USA \ all of the passengers in his car http://shorewall.net \________________________________________________
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances and start using them to simplify application deployment and accelerate your shift to cloud computing http://p.sf.net/sfu/novell-sfdev2dev
_______________________________________________ Shorewall-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users
