if u find sfq unfair u can try WRR.<br>but if for example one flow is eating all the badwidth and a new flow starts, the new has to "claim" he's part by going from slow transfer to fast one. <br>u can try making normal QOS based on classes and give one class to every customer. should work best. remember to do the same on both upload and download
<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/9/05, <b class="gmail_sendername">Scott Mcdermott</b> <<a href="mailto:lartc@vaxerdec.net">lartc@vaxerdec.net</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
I am looking for a simple way to guarantee to each flow<br>going through my traffic control point 1/numflows of<br>bandwidth. I thought using SFQ would do this effectively<br>but it appears to be quite unfair: a very high speed
<br>download that fills the pipe easily starves smaller flows to<br>the point where it becomes unusable (especially if they are<br>at all interactive)<br><br>Because numflows is dynamic, I'm not sure how I would have<br>the bandwidth allocated to each flow change dynamically and
<br>automatically as flows are added and removed.<br><br>Anyone have an idea how to implement this? Thanks.<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>LARTC mailing list<br><a href="mailto:LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl">
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl</a><br><a href="http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc">http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc</a><br></blockquote></div><br><br><br>-- <br>Miłego Dnia<br>Krystian Antoni