Gary G. Hendershot wrote: > I will echo the thoughts of Tom Lynn ... > <snip> > I am using voice prioritization on 2 including the one I keep in my home ... > It seems that when I use the voice prioritization scheme, even when there is > no voice traffic, the general internet access looses some of its steam ... > But I have not run any definitive tests on it so at this point, its just gut > feel, no proof ... > > What the voice priority scheme will do, is keep my wife's streaming > audio/video adiction from messing with my voice traffic ... So even if it > does have a modest hit, it seems to be worth it to me ... As always, your > mileage may vary ... > I am not a traffic shaping expert, but I will do my best to explain why it is impossible to do traffic shaping without taking some hit on total throughput. In a nutshell, you MUST reduce the overall total potential bandwidth purposely so that YOU become the bottleneck, not your internet connection. So for example, if you have a 3 MB downlink and a 512k uplink, you have no choice but to reduce those purposely to say 90% of those values to do proper traffic shaping. If you are unwilling to do that, you are willing to have your internet provider do the shaping because once you reach the limit provided by your internet provider, that's exactly what will happen. (to use Gary's example, his wife will saturate the link with the video stream and some packets will be dropped, making the voice link very poor).
Hopefully that explains it better, but you will see a drop in total throughput with traffic shaping enabled. Darrick -- Darrick Hartman DJH Solutions, LLC http://www.djhsolutions.com _______________________________________________ Astlinux-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.kriscompanies.com/mailman/listinfo/astlinux-users Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
