Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 13:49:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 13:49:31 -0500 Received: from fw-west.west.akamai.com ([63.102.156.130]:35823 "EHLO akamai.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 13:49:22 -0500 Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:23:26 -0800 (PST) From: Rajeev Bector To: Helge Hafting cc: Rajeev Bector , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: using TOS as a key in route cache In-Reply-To: <3A2B750C.924E6CAB@idb.hist.no> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello Thanks for your reply. But this can create problems in some of the cases. For example, "scp" over TCP starts with TOS 0, then goes to 8 (bulk data). What happens is that when RTOs are cached, they are updated for TOS 8 and not for TOS 0, therefore a new connection does not pick up the cached RTO. Does this make sense ? Thanks, -- Rajeev (Again, please cc replies to rajeev@akamai.com) On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Helge Hafting wrote: > Rajeev Bector wrote: > > > > Guys > > I am looking for a reason as to why we want > > to have different route cache entries for > > different IP ToS types. Does anyone have > > any insight into this ? > > Because you may want to route time-critical stuff like > video through a dedicated fast network and slow stuff like email > through another. Such a setup prevents an email burst from > disrupting video. > > There are many similiar uses. > > Helge Hafting > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/