Re: HFSC and that ATM overhead problem (Another VOIP QoS post. Ahhhh)

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

To: Fog_Watch <db5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: HFSC and that ATM overhead problem (Another VOIP QoS post. Ahhhh)
From: Giovanni Bajo <rasky@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 15:34:07 +0100
Cc: lartc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20071104230419.6987d1d1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: Develer S.r.l.

On dom, 2007-11-04 at 23:04 +1100, Fog_Watch wrote:

> HFSC appears to be the queueing discipline of choice for VOIP.

Is it? Any pointers?
-- 
Giovanni Bajo


_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc

Follow-Ups:
- Re: HFSC and that ATM overhead problem (Another VOIP QoS post. Ahhhh)
  - From: Ian
- Re: HFSC and that ATM overhead problem (Another VOIP QoS post. Ahhhh)
  - From: Michal Soltys

References:
- HFSC and that ATM overhead problem (Another VOIP QoS post. Ahhhh)
  - From: Fog_Watch

Prev by Date: Re: HFSC and that ATM overhead problem (Another VOIP QoS post. Ahhhh)
Next by Date: Re: Bridging two subnets selectively using routing
Previous by thread: Re: HFSC and that ATM overhead problem (Another VOIP QoS post. Ahhhh)
Next by thread: Re: HFSC and that ATM overhead problem (Another VOIP QoS post. Ahhhh)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Bugtraq] [Fedora Legacy] [GCC Help] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [IP Tables] [Netfilter Devel] [Fedora Users]