netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: dummy as IMQ replacement

To: Hasso Tepper <hasso@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: dummy as IMQ replacement
From: Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:00:48 +0100
Cc: hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Nguyen Dinh Nam <nguyendinhnam@xxxxxxxxx>, Remus <rmocius@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andre Tomt <andre@xxxxxxxx>, syrius.ml@xxxxxxxxxx, Andy Furniss <andy.furniss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Damion de Soto <damion@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <200501311646.14322.hasso@estpak.ee>
References: <1107123123.8021.80.camel@jzny.localdomain> <200501311614.31397.hasso@estpak.ee> <1107181551.7847.193.camel@jzny.localdomain> <200501311646.14322.hasso@estpak.ee>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 04:46:14PM +0200, Hasso Tepper wrote:

> This is somewhat related to killing the chance to use iptables as well ... 
> Iptables has better documentation and people use it just because of that.

I'm afraid I have to agree on this one.  The idea behind iptables is
easy to grasp, whereas tc isn't totally obvious, and all tc 'tutorials'
out there just give you a long list of commands to type in but don't
really explain you what goes on under the hood.

And you can't just expect everyone to "Go look at the source."


--L

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>