[LARTC] counter-strike
Andreas Klauer
Andreas.Klauer at metamorpher.de
Thu Mar 2 19:53:49 CET 2006
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 08:17:43PM +0200, Sorin Panca wrote:
> I've made a test. I've added
> 1: ---- 1:1 --- 10:
> htb class sfq
If that SFQ is the standard sfq with a queuelength of 128 packets,
it might be responsible for some of the delay. Unless you have
connections in there that can choke the whole bandwidth (probably
possible with CS if you set the rates up, I don't know), you may
not need SFQ for interactive bands at all.
> People in my LAN play almost exclusively in MAN, not in the Internet. I
> allocated such high bandwidth because htb would allocate the spare based
> on classes' rates ratios. And since 1:1 is a root class as 1:2 and 1:3
> (MAN and Internet respectively) it had to have such a rate even if it is
> not found in my real bandwidth.
I don't think I follow your explanation here. How do you expect HTB to
guarantee a rate for a class (that's what it claims to do) when there
is no bandwidth to back it up.
I've never dealt with MANs before, so I may be completely wrong.
Usually you should not have more than one root class, and you should
not let HTB think it can use more bandwidth than there actually is.
It's extremely hard to understand the logic behind setups like this
and therefore likely to get unexpected results from them.
Regards
Andreas Klauer
More information about the LARTC
mailing list