On Sunday 11 February 2007 16:48:10 Tomasz Chilinski wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:19:54 +0100, Alejandro Lorenzo Gallego wrote
>
> > > > [cut]
> > >
> > > Have u tried to replace CLASSIFY target by MARK target and then using
> > > fw filter? I have got bad experience with CLASSIFY target.
> >
> > Behaviour is identical if i use classify or mark, however, i
> > expected this, because the packets do go to the right classes, it's
> > just it looks that ESFQ is not assuring fairness between users
>
> Which version of ESFQ? Patch for 2.6.15.1 or 2.6.19.2?
>
> Bests, Tomasz Chilinski.
>

Actually for 2.6.29.2 

And i made some progress, using a depth parameter higher than default (800) it 
behaves better and closer to fairness.... 

¿Can some explain the exact meaning of limit and depth options?

Thank you

Attachment: pgpAqN2JgAmS4.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc

Reply via email to