Re: Rate limiting with "tc"?
- From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@xxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 23:03:31 +0000 (UTC)
Grant <g_r_a_n_t_@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Both rsync and wget offer working rate-limiting in userspace, why is
it then that people are still saying inbound throttling cannot be
done when there are these working examples of it?
I cannot speak to can/cannot do inbound throttling in tc, but will
point-out that when a receiver does rate limiting above the socket
layer he may induce some behavoiurs in TCP (eg zero window probing)
which are not _normally_ seen in a transfer, nor in a situation when
the rate limiting is implemented _below_ TCP.
It may not matter for rsync and wget in and of themselves, but it can
be an issue if it is used in say load generators for networked server
benchmarking.
rick jones
--
No need to believe in either side, or any side. There is no cause.
There's only yourself. The belief is in your own precision. - Jobert
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...
.
- References:
- Rate limiting with "tc"?
- From: Ravenpi
- Re: Rate limiting with "tc"?
- From: Felix Tiede
- Re: Rate limiting with "tc"?
- From: Ravenpi
- Re: Rate limiting with "tc"?
- From: D. Stussy
- Re: Rate limiting with "tc"?
- From: Grant
- Rate limiting with "tc"?
- Prev by Date: Re: Rate limiting with "tc"?
- Next by Date: setting up lax security on one ethernet interface while leaving the other strict
- Previous by thread: Re: Rate limiting with "tc"?
- Next by thread: Re: Rate limiting with "tc"?
- Index(es):