Subject: Re: [PATCH] packet delay scheduler

From: "David S. Miller" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 14:21:12 -0800

On 19 Mar 2004 09:52:07 -0500
jamal <[email-masked]> wrote:

> The better alternative is to use the tc extension patches i have
> because then you could write little modules which do different things
> and cascade them. 

I agree that this chaining idea of tc actions is the end-all-be-all
way to do this kind of stuff.

But for now we can put Stephen's delay scheduler in the tree, and I
don't see any real problem with that until your tc action changes
are ready for integration.