[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: PF HFSC - need help with rules



Henning Brauer wrote:
> * Alexey E. Suslikov <[email protected]> [2004-04-24 10:52]:
>> 1. you can't proceed with linkshare 0% (in the difference to original ALTQ
>> implementation). this bug (yes, bug!) is confirmed by Kenjiro Cho
>> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openbsd-misc&m=107695019310171&w=2
>> but unfortunately not fixed yet.
> 
> huch, got lost. kenjiro is flying in as we speak so we'll sit together 
> and look at that...
> 
>> excuse me, Henning, but who needs "bandwidth" with HFSC? i see lot of
>> people (including me) who (theoretically properly) ommits "bandwidth"
>> and reaps these confusing things.
> 
> maybe you like a lot of knobs to twiddle with, but that's not our way, 
> sorry.
> hfsc with just bandwith specified and no realtime or upperlimit has to 
> work, and queue blah bandwidth X is the natural way to do that.
:) sometimes. but this is not right to force skilled pilot (who likes
lot of buttons) to use newbie (with one button) interface to aircraft,
because "lot of buttons interface" don't work as expected due "one
button interface" existance. citating Kenjiro's mail "it's confusing
for those who knows hfsc".
additionally, after-merged hfsc behavior breaks logic of pre-merged.
imagine skilled pilot of B747 confused by one big red button instead
of many while migrating to, says, B777.
yes, we need two sets of buttons to configure. but we also need two
non-conflicting sets. that's it.