> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 00:12:02 +0300
> 4 wrote:
>> i haven't used queues for a long time, but now there is a need.
>> previously, queues had not only a hierarchy, but also a priority. now
>> there is no priority, only the hierarchy exists.
> It took me quite some time to wrap my head around
> On 11/29/23 6:47 PM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>> On 2023-11-29, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
yes, all this can be make without hierarchy, only with priorities(because
hierarchy it's priorities), but who and why decided that eight would be
enough? the one who created cbq- he created it
Michael Hekeler :
> To be honest I don't understand the problem you described.
It is simple, when you come from Android (tested Android 11 tablet) with file
names exceeding the FAT spec
these are cut to 8.3 format in OpenBSD. Android doesn't give any hint on the
situation because it is
>
> There is also some ironic stuff behind these happenings: if you have
> the possibility to check your lost long file names you will discover
> that the most significant information are contained in the first 99 chars.
>
>
> Nowarez Market wrote:
>
> >
> > Clearly the problem is that from
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 00:12:02 +0300
4 wrote:
> i haven't used queues for a long time, but now there is a need.
> previously, queues had not only a hierarchy, but also a priority. now
> there is no priority, only the hierarchy exists.
It took me quite some time to wrap my head around this, having
On Thu, 2023-11-30 at 15:55 +0300, 4 wrote:
> "cbq can entirely be expressed in it" ok. so how do i set priorities
> for queues in hfsc
You stack HFSC with link-share service curves with linkshare criterion
1:0 - or in pf.conf(5) terms: "bandwidth 1" and "bandwidth 0".
Or you do not configure
On 11/29/23 6:47 PM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2023-11-29, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
yes, all this can be make without hierarchy, only with priorities(because hierarchy it's
priorities), but who and why decided that eight would be enough? the one who created cbq- he
created it for practical
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 02:57:23PM +0300, 4 wrote:
>> so what happened to cbq? why such the powerful and useful thing was removed?
>> or Theo delete it precisely because it was too good for obsd? %D
> Actually, the new queueing system was done by Henning, planned as far back
> as (at least)
On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 03:55:49PM +0300, 4 wrote:
>
> "cbq can entirely be expressed in it" ok. so how do i set priorities for
> queues in hfsc for my local(not for a router above that knows nothing about
> my existence. tos is an absolutely unviable concept in the real world)
> pf-router? i
> On 2023-11-29, 4 wrote:
>> here is a simple task, there are millions of such tasks. there is an
>> internet connection, and although it is declared as symmetrical 100mbit
>> it's 100 for download, but for upload it depends on the time of day, so
>> we can forget about the channel width and
On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 02:57:23PM +0300, 4 wrote:
> so what happened to cbq? why such the powerful and useful thing was removed?
> or Theo delete it precisely because it was too good for obsd? %D
Actually, the new queueing system was done by Henning, planned as far back
as (at least) 2012
so what happened to cbq? why such the powerful and useful thing was removed? or
Theo delete it precisely because it was too good for obsd? %D
12 matches
Mail list logo
