[lkml]   [2004]   [Jan]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC/PATCH] IMQ port to 2.6
    On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 02:22:19PM -0500, jamal wrote:
    > There has been no real good reason as to why IMQ is needed to begin
    > with. It may be easy to use and has been highly publized (which is
    > always a dangerous thing in Linux).
    > Maybe lets take a step back and see how people use it. How and why do
    > you use IMQ? Is this because you couldnt use the ingress qdisc?

    Think multiple clients connected via PPP. I want to shape traffic,
    so ingress is out of question. I want different clients in a same
    htb class, so using qdisc on each ppp interface is out of
    question. It seems to me that IMQ is the only way to achieve my goals.

    > Note, the abstraction to begin with is in the wrong place - it sure is
    > an easy and nice looking hack. So is the current ingress qdisc, but we
    > are laying that to rest with TC extensions.
    With best regards,
    Vladimir Savkin.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:00    [W:0.020 / U:21.636 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site