> On Wed, Oct 07, 1998 at 06:41:31PM -0400, David Feuer wrote:
>
> > If this has been rejected or implemented before, please let me
> > know, but....
>
> > I am often frustrated that when I am running a network-intensive
> > long-term process (generally a big FTP download), I get a big
> > slowdown of burst-oriented interactive use (email, web browser,
> > etc.). This is a particular problem since I am using a PPP
> > connection. I have a couple ideas for solving this problem, and
> > similar ones.
>
> There is also a wealth of information and code available on the 'net
> about this.
>
> > First, I think that programs should have a netnice value (nnice?),
> > along with a nice value. When transmitting packets, lower niceness
> > processes (or threads.....) get higher priority. So if I were
> > running a significant-use ftp server, I could set the netnice for
> > my ftp server to 13, allowing other processes on my machine to have
> > better responsiveness.
>
> This is indeed possible - linux can and does prioritize packets when
> sending them.
>
> Generally though, lack of responsiveness for many people is an issue
> when they are on the receiver side.
>
> > When I am doing a big FTP download, web browsing often slows to a
> > crawl. I was thinking that there might be some way to combine
> > kernel-level changes with a modification of the pppd client+server
> > to support some prioritization of the PPP link.
>
> You need your ISP to support QoS - most don't yet.
How about telling me how, where, etc.
>
> > I don't really know how this would work.
>
> It works great - I use it here. But since I am my ISP, I have some
> flexibility most people don't.
>
> > I think that some of these ideas (probably with huge modifications)
> > could help improve Linux network performance.
>
> Linux has all this and more... you just need the rest of the 'net to
> catch up.
>
> > Remove "NOSPAM" to reply.
>
> Spam blockers suck... it rude to use them and they aren't necessary.
> Anyhow, I don't see a NOSPAM is your headers, only the body - and
> most email address are harvested from headers only, because it yields
> better results.
>
> Oh, and things like NOSPAM are trivial to work around - I've written
> a perl script which connects to NNTP servers, uses XOVER and a few
> simple rules to harvest _many_ _many_ email address, including many
> with spam blockers.
You are calling spam blockers rude while you are sending spam? By the
way, I don't want to see anything from you or anything related to you in
my mailbox. Any such action will be considered a denial-of-service attack
on my system.
>
>
>
>
> -cw
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/