> It works fine for me, although I haven't used CBQ previously so I can't
> comapre them. It just works for me, except the delays in interactive class
> are too long, even when the prio is 0 (highest) and the rate and ceil are
> maximum. Maybe CBQ is better in reducing the delays... Anybody solved this
> problem?
There is a way with htb to get really low delays. It can be found on the htb
homepage (http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/qos/htb/manual/userg.htm#prio, last
paragraph).
Basically, you have 2 classes : on rated to xx% of the link and an other rated
to 100-X%. If you make sure you NEVER send more data to the 100-xx% class so
it never has to ask for more bandwidth, it will have very low delays. If you
send more data, the situation is reversed and that class will get very high
delays. I still have to test it, but you can use the policer in the filters
to make sure you never send more data then the rate of the class.
Stef
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Using Linux as bandwidth manager"
http://www.docum.org/
#lartc @ irc.oftc.net
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
