Re: [Mldonkey-users] Protocol efficiency

[Goswin Brederlow]

"Christian H. Kuhn" <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi Goswin,
> 
> & Goswin Brederlow <address@hidden> [2002-11-28 20:55]:
> > "Christian H. Kuhn" <address@hidden> writes:
> > Its a problem of dsl and tcp/ip.
> [very good explanation snipped]
> 
> Your explanation gives the cause of the general inefficiency of the
> donkey protocol. It does not explain the difference between eMule
> and mldonkey.
> 
> > So what can one do?
> > 
> > 1.) Limit the upload to 4 KB/s for each donkey. Don't have more than
> > 12 KB/s upload alltogether. The ACKs need some bandwith too so 4+4
> > does make 12 given enough downloads.
> 
> This can be done. But IIRC there is an automatic download limit when
> the upload is limited below 10 kB?

Never seen any of it and even had 92KB/s down with 1KB/s up.

> > 2.) Use QoS (Quality of Service) alias "Fair" Scheduling.  You can
> > resort waiting frames so ACKs can skip to the front of the line. You
> > can also limit the upload generated by mldonkey to say 8KB/s
> > alltogether for all clients so there is enough for irc, web, mail,
> > ftp. You can schedule the traffic so that mldonkey only gets bandwith
> > thats not used up otherwise, usw.
> 
> AFAIK QoS is not really available in 2.4.19. And i can't afford being
> a beta tester. But i remember an article about bandwith limitation in
> c't ... when 2.4.20 is available, i'll try it.

The only thing missing in 2.4.19 is the HTB (Hierarchy Token Bucket)
scheduler that is used in the CT article. Its a small patch you have
to apply and then even that works. HTB is just one choise how to
schedule and its easier to undersand than (the) other scheduler.

MfG
        Goswin