amuza

I have also tested the examples at http://linux-tc-notes.sourceforge.net/tc/doc/sch_hfsc.txt in two different labs (both virtuals, I must say) and have not managed to see the expected latency results.

I think I can ask it in an easier way. With the configuration below I get far more delay on 192.168.10.0/24 traffic than on 192.168.20.0/24 traffic. Am I doing something wrong? If you think it is better to ask for support somewhere else and you know where, I'd be grateful if you let me know. Thank you. tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: hfsc default 90 tc class add dev eth0 parent 1:0 classid 1:1 hfsc ls m2 100kbps ul m2 100kbps tc class add dev eth0 parent 1:1 classid 1:10 hfsc rt m1 50kbps d...

HFSC: rt traffic far more delayed than ls traffic

Question on HFSC Real Time and Upper Limit