--0-1621299949-1046114657=:33949 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi All, I am fairly new to Linux and TC. I am currently implementing Bandwidth Management/Traffic Control for a gateway product which is based on Linux 2.4.18 kernel. I am required to implement some kind of a user based traffic control where each user(source IP) is allocated a fixed amount of bandwidth. I also need to do traffic shaping both for the eggress and ingress traffic. Going through LARTC documentation , I found that IMQ with HTB will suit my requirement. Is anybody using IMQ with HTB? Can HTB and IMQ work with 2.4.18 kernel? If so, where can i download all the patches? It is difficult for us to migrate to 2.4.20 kernel as most of the software has already been developed using 2.4.18 kernel. I really appreciate any help in this regard. Thanks, Hemanth --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more --0-1621299949-1046114657=:33949 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii <P>Hi All,</P> <P>I am fairly new to Linux and TC. I am currently implementing Bandwidth Management/Traffic Control for a gateway product which is based on Linux 2.4.18 kernel. I am required to implement some kind of a user based traffic control where each user(source IP) is allocated a fixed amount of bandwidth. I also need to do traffic shaping both for the eggress and ingress traffic. Going through LARTC documentation , I found that IMQ with HTB will suit my requirement. Is anybody using IMQ with HTB? Can HTB and IMQ work with 2.4.18 kernel? If so, where can i download all the patches? It is difficult for us to migrate to 2.4.20 kernel as most of the software has already been developed using 2.4.18 kernel.</P> <P>I really appreciate any help in this regard.</P> <P>Thanks,</P> <P>Hemanth</P> <P> </P><p><br><hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!?<br> <a href="http://rd.yahoo.com/finance/mailtagline/*http://taxes.yahoo.com/">Yahoo! Tax Center</a> - forms, calculators, tips, and more --0-1621299949-1046114657=:33949--
On Monday 24 February 2003 20:24, hanumantha kavuluru wrote: > Hi All, > > I am fairly new to Linux and TC. I am currently implementing Bandwidth > Management/Traffic Control for a gateway product which is based on Linux > 2.4.18 kernel. I am required to implement some kind of a user based traffic > control where each user(source IP) is allocated a fixed amount of > bandwidth. I also need to do traffic shaping both for the eggress and > ingress traffic. Going through LARTC documentation , I found that IMQ with > HTB will suit my requirement. Is anybody using IMQ with HTB? Can HTB and > IMQ work with 2.4.18 kernel? If so, where can i download all the patches? > It is difficult for us to migrate to 2.4.20 kernel as most of the software > has already been developed using 2.4.18 kernel. http://luxik.cdi.cz/~patrick/imq/ http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/qos/htb/ And you don't need imq. If you have a gateway, you can shape on both interface so you can control up- and download traffic. Just wondering, what kind of software do you developped so you can not use kernel 2.4.20 ?? Stef -- stef.coene@docum.org "Using Linux as bandwidth manager" http://www.docum.org/ #lartc @ irc.oftc.net
--0-1813173984-1046117955=:10874 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi All, Thanks for the help. Stef, our product is already out in the market with 2.4.18 kernel. So if we change the kernel, we will have to go through a full QA cycle which is something we don't want to do :). BTW, I would like to have global limits on the Bandwidth per user irrespective of which interface the traffic might go.Can i do this without using IMQ? Also i want to do my own classification by setting the skb->priority field with the appropriate class ID. Is it possible to use this kind of classification with IMQ and HTB? i really appreciate your help. Thanks, Hemanth Stef Coene <stef.coene@docum.org> wrote:On Monday 24 February 2003 20:24, hanumantha kavuluru wrote: > Hi All, > > I am fairly new to Linux and TC. I am currently implementing Bandwidth > Management/Traffic Control for a gateway product which is based on Linux > 2.4.18 kernel. I am required to implement some kind of a user based traffic > control where each user(source IP) is allocated a fixed amount of > bandwidth. I also need to do traffic shaping both for the eggress and > ingress traffic. Going through LARTC documentation , I found that IMQ with > HTB will suit my requirement. Is anybody using IMQ with HTB? Can HTB and > IMQ work with 2.4.18 kernel? If so, where can i download all the patches? > It is difficult for us to migrate to 2.4.20 kernel as most of the software > has already been developed using 2.4.18 kernel. http://luxik.cdi.cz/~patrick/imq/ http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/qos/htb/ And you don't need imq. If you have a gateway, you can shape on both interface so you can control up- and download traffic. Just wondering, what kind of software do you developped so you can not use kernel 2.4.20 ?? Stef -- stef.coene@docum.org "Using Linux as bandwidth manager" http://www.docum.org/ #lartc @ irc.oftc.net _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more --0-1813173984-1046117955=:10874 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii <P>Hi All, <P>Thanks for the help. Stef, our product is already out in the market with 2.4.18 kernel. So if we change the kernel, we will have to go through a full QA cycle which is something we don't want to do :). BTW, I would like to have global limits on the Bandwidth per user irrespective of which interface the traffic might go.Can i do this without using IMQ? Also i want to do my own classification by setting the skb->priority field with the appropriate class ID. Is it possible to use this kind of classification with IMQ and HTB? <P>i really appreciate your help. <P>Thanks, <P>Hemanth <P> <P> <B><I>Stef Coene <stef.coene@docum.org></I></B> wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">On Monday 24 February 2003 20:24, hanumantha kavuluru wrote:<BR>> Hi All,<BR>><BR>> I am fairly new to Linux and TC. I am currently implementing Bandwidth<BR>> Management/Traffic Control for a gateway product which is based on Linux<BR>> 2.4.18 kernel. I am required to implement some kind of a user based traffic<BR>> control where each user(source IP) is allocated a fixed amount of<BR>> bandwidth. I also need to do traffic shaping both for the eggress and<BR>> ingress traffic. Going through LARTC documentation , I found that IMQ with<BR>> HTB will suit my requirement. Is anybody using IMQ with HTB? Can HTB and<BR>> IMQ work with 2.4.18 kernel? If so, where can i download all the patches?<BR>> It is difficult for us to migrate to 2.4.20 kernel as most of the software<BR>> has already been developed using 2.4.18 kernel.<BR>http://luxik.cdi.cz/~patrick/imq/<BR>http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/qos/htb/<BR>And you don't need imq. If you have a gateway, you can shape on both <BR>interface so you can control up- and download traffic.<BR><BR>Just wondering, what kind of software do you developped so you can not use <BR>kernel 2.4.20 ??<BR><BR>Stef<BR><BR>-- <BR><BR>stef.coene@docum.org<BR>"Using Linux as bandwidth manager"<BR>http://www.docum.org/<BR>#lartc @ irc.oftc.net<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl<BR>http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/</BLOCKQUOTE><p><br><hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!?<br> <a href="http://rd.yahoo.com/finance/mailtagline/*http://taxes.yahoo.com/">Yahoo! Tax Center</a> - forms, calculators, tips, and more --0-1813173984-1046117955=:10874--
On Monday 24 February 2003 21:19, hanumantha kavuluru wrote: > Hi All, > Thanks for the help. Stef, our product is already out in the market with > 2.4.18 kernel. So if we change the kernel, we will have to go through a > full QA cycle which is something we don't want to do :). Ok > BTW, I would like > to have global limits on the Bandwidth per user irrespective of which > interface the traffic might go.Can i do this without using IMQ? So you want up + down = fixed bandwidth? Then you need IMQ. > Also i want > to do my own classification by setting the skb->priority field with the > appropriate class ID. Is it possible to use this kind of classification > with IMQ and HTB? I don't know the internals of tc, but I think you can do. Stef -- stef.coene@docum.org "Using Linux as bandwidth manager" http://www.docum.org/ #lartc @ irc.oftc.net
--0-85426278-1046119233=:25644 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Stef, That is right. I want to do up+down = fixed bandwidth. Thanks for your help. Hemanth Stef Coene <stef.coene@docum.org> wrote:On Monday 24 February 2003 21:19, hanumantha kavuluru wrote: > Hi All, > Thanks for the help. Stef, our product is already out in the market with > 2.4.18 kernel. So if we change the kernel, we will have to go through a > full QA cycle which is something we don't want to do :). Ok > BTW, I would like > to have global limits on the Bandwidth per user irrespective of which > interface the traffic might go.Can i do this without using IMQ? So you want up + down = fixed bandwidth? Then you need IMQ. > Also i want > to do my own classification by setting the skb->priority field with the > appropriate class ID. Is it possible to use this kind of classification > with IMQ and HTB? I don't know the internals of tc, but I think you can do. Stef -- stef.coene@docum.org "Using Linux as bandwidth manager" http://www.docum.org/ #lartc @ irc.oftc.net _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more --0-85426278-1046119233=:25644 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii <P>Stef, <P>That is right. I want to do up+down = fixed bandwidth. Thanks for your help. <P>Hemanth <P> <B><I>Stef Coene <stef.coene@docum.org></I></B> wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">On Monday 24 February 2003 21:19, hanumantha kavuluru wrote:<BR>> Hi All,<BR>> Thanks for the help. Stef, our product is already out in the market with<BR>> 2.4.18 kernel. So if we change the kernel, we will have to go through a<BR>> full QA cycle which is something we don't want to do :). <BR>Ok<BR><BR>> BTW, I would like<BR>> to have global limits on the Bandwidth per user irrespective of which<BR>> interface the traffic might go.Can i do this without using IMQ?<BR>So you want up + down = fixed bandwidth? Then you need IMQ.<BR><BR>> Also i want<BR>> to do my own classification by setting the skb->priority field with the<BR>> appropriate class ID. Is it possible to use this kind of classification<BR>> with IMQ and HTB? <BR>I don't know the internals of tc, but I think you can do.<BR><BR>Stef<BR><BR>-- <BR><BR>stef.coene@docum.org<BR>"Using Linux as bandwidth manager"<BR>http://www.docum.org/<BR>#lartc @ irc.oftc.net<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl<BR>http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/</BLOCKQUOTE><p><br><hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!?<br> <a href="http://rd.yahoo.com/finance/mailtagline/*http://taxes.yahoo.com/">Yahoo! Tax Center</a> - forms, calculators, tips, and more --0-85426278-1046119233=:25644--
Hi, There is no options at all to 'shape' upload+download=fixed bandwidth without using IMQ virtual device ? So if somebody is planning to give customer fixed bandwidth regarless if a customer is 'uploading' or 'downloading',he (or she:) MUST use IMQ virtual device ? Anybody did some tests of configuring same traffic shaping with and without using IMQ device ? How IMQ device (kernel) will behave on heavy load traffic (like VoIP,gaming,other 'real-time' traffic) comparing on mashine without using IMQ virtual device ? Does anybody did some test on using u32 filter and fw filter ? How does each one behave on same mashine,same kernel,same traffic shaping configuration ? f2zubac On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, Stef Coene wrote: > On Monday 24 February 2003 21:19, hanumantha kavuluru wrote: > > Hi All, > > Thanks for the help. Stef, our product is already out in the market with > > 2.4.18 kernel. So if we change the kernel, we will have to go through a > > full QA cycle which is something we don't want to do :). > Ok > > > BTW, I would like > > to have global limits on the Bandwidth per user irrespective of which > > interface the traffic might go.Can i do this without using IMQ? > So you want up + down = fixed bandwidth? Then you need IMQ. > > > Also i want > > to do my own classification by setting the skb->priority field with the > > appropriate class ID. Is it possible to use this kind of classification > > with IMQ and HTB? > I don't know the internals of tc, but I think you can do. > > Stef > > -- > > stef.coene@docum.org > "Using Linux as bandwidth manager" > http://www.docum.org/ > #lartc @ irc.oftc.net > > _______________________________________________ > LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl > http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ >
On Tuesday 25 February 2003 11:38, Dragan Zubac wrote: > Hi, > > There is no options at all to 'shape' upload+download=fixed bandwidth > without using IMQ virtual device ? You can only control traffic that leaves an interface and you can't combine 2 interfaces. But with the imq device, you can redirect whatever-you-want traffic to the 1 device. So you can redirect traffic that leaves eth0 and eth1 to the same device, you can combine both interfaces. > So if somebody is planning to give > customer fixed bandwidth regarless if a customer is 'uploading' or > 'downloading',he (or she:) MUST use IMQ virtual device ? Anybody did some > tests of configuring same traffic shaping with and without using IMQ > device ? No. But sometimes you need the imq device. > How IMQ device (kernel) will behave on heavy load traffic > (like VoIP,gaming,other 'real-time' traffic) comparing on mashine without > using IMQ virtual device ? Good. > Does anybody did some test on using u32 filter and fw filter ? How does > each one behave on same mashine,same kernel,same traffic shaping > configuration ? As long as you don't have more then 10^6 filter rules, you are fine :) You should be more worry about active classes. I once created 5000 active classes on a 486, 25Mhz, 8MB Ram and I was able to shape 10mbit without remarkable delays. Stef -- stef.coene@docum.org "Using Linux as bandwidth manager" http://www.docum.org/ #lartc @ irc.oftc.net