[Cerowrt-devel] "Lupin undeclared"?
alan.christopher.jenkins at gmail.com
Fri Jul 10 11:39:33 EDT 2015
On 10/07/15 16:16, Rich Brown wrote:
> Hi Fred,
> I'm not familiar with "lupin undeclared" - could you send a pointer/link? Thanks.
The unversioned testing build Dave posted at
which is not declared on the CeroWrt homepage. (Presumably to avoid
giving a false impression about how much life and commitment there is in
> On Jul 10, 2015, at 10:52 AM, Fred Stratton <fredstratton at imap.cc> wrote:
>> You are absolutely correct.
>> I tried both a numeric overhead value, and alternatively 'pppoe-vcmux' and 'ether-fcs' in the build I crafted based on r46006, which is lupin undeclared version 2. Everything works as stated.
>> On lupin undeclared version 4, the current release based on r46117, the values were not recognised.
>> Thank you.
>> I had cake running on a Lantiq ADSL gateway running the same r46006 build. Unfortunately this was bricked by attempts to get homenet working, so I have nothing to report about gateway usage at present.
unrelated, but ow, you have my sympathy. I'd love to have a working
lantiq with openwrt and fq_codel.
>> On 10/07/15 13:57, Jonathan Morton wrote:
>>> You're already using correct syntax - I've written it to be quite lenient and use sensible defaults for missing information. There are several sets of keywords and parameters which are mutually orthogonal, and don't depend on each other, so "besteffort" has nothing to do with "overhead" or "atm".
>>> What's probably happening is that you're using a slightly old version of the cake kernel module which lacks the overhead parameter entirely, but a more up to date tc which does support it. We've seen this combination crop up ourselves recently.
>>> - Jonathan Morton
>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>> Cerowrt-devel at lists.bufferbloat.net
> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> Cerowrt-devel at lists.bufferbloat.net
More information about the Cerowrt-devel