Re: further CBQ/tc documentation ds9a.nl/lartc/manpages

[jamal <hadi@cyberus.ca>]

For starters, i think you need a defintions sections. Look at:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-diffserv-model-06.txt

(eg what is a shaper etc and how trhings are placed together). At least
that will ensure that you dont sday things like "Prio cant shape".

It is a good model but may be insufficient given Linux TCs
capabilities. Email me when unsure.

Some other things:
- In your comment "Do not confuse this classless simple qdisc with the
classful PRIO one!". This is misleading:
the default 3 band FIFO queue is conceptually the same as the
default prio qdisc (the priomaps are identical). 3 bands; same
prioritization schemes.
- You really need to fix ingress section:
 it works for both forwarding and packets coming in to local sockets.
More importantly, It takes advantages of _all_ filter schemes
available for TC as well as the policing functionality (which sadly seemed
to have been replicated by someone in netfilter, wrongly if i may add ;->).
- You keep saying "reodering" -- dont know what that means. Reordering is
generally considered a Bad Thing(tm).

- your description of the "peakrate" (same in TBF as well as policing)

Well captured. It took ages to get this into peoples heads. This also
applies to CBQ.

- your description of "MTU"
Not very good description:
This is just what it literally says; maximum transmit unit;
A packet larger than this will be dropped. Default is 2K. For ethernet,
MTUs of 1500 bytes, this is fine; however, you should put a cautionary
statement here in regards to people having MTUs smaller than 2K (example
the lo device); they might find that all their packets greater than 2K
being dropped.


More later if dont get distracted.

cheers,
jamal