Since I keep receiving lots of visits to lartc.linuxsystems.it from spinics archives & co, I''d like to point out I closed the wiki when the original domain changed maintainer: http://www.spinics.net/lists/lartc/msg22400.html http://lartc.org is alive and kicking and there is no need for another wiki anymore. I''d like to thank both Bert and Carl-Daniel. Niccolò Il 28/12/2011 16:52, Niccolò Belli ha scritto:> Hi, > I still didn''t find a viable solution for the LARTC wiki, so I decided > to start hosting it on my own server. Later we can easily switch > somewhere else if we keep using the same wiki engine (and maybe even > with another wiki engine). > I decided to use wikimedia because it''s the only one I know of, so if > someone knows a better alternative please let me know, we are still in > time for a change. > Since I never used a wiki seriously I will probably need someone else > who can help me maintaining it, please let me know if you are > experienced and willing to help. > > Here is the wiki: http://lartc.linuxsystems.it/ > And here is the new mailing list for those who still don''t know: > http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#lartc > > I just copy-pasted the Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control HOWTO > atm, it still needs to be wikified and we still need to choose how to > organize the contents. > > Cheers, > Niccolò
On 2012-06-01 12:42, Niccolò Belli wrote:> http://lartc.org is alive and kicking and there is no need for > another > wiki anymore. I''d like to thank both Bert and Carl-Daniel. > > Niccolò >Very cool ! I''ll try to find some time and move over some of the content I have here: http://wiki.linuxwall.info/doku.php/en:ressources:dossiers:networking:traffic_control -- Julien Vehent - http://1nw.eu/!j
Julien Vehent wrote:> On 2012-06-01 12:42, Niccolò Belli wrote: >> http://lartc.org is alive and kicking and there is no need for >> another >> wiki anymore. I''d like to thank both Bert and Carl-Daniel. >> >> Niccolò >> > > Very cool ! > I''ll try to find some time and move over some of the content I have > here: > http://wiki.linuxwall.info/doku.php/en:ressources:dossiers:networking:traffic_controlA couple of things that stand out after skimming through. DSL - Jeesper''s overhead as noted in the comments is not 5 and anyway I think his good work has now been superseded by stab as it allows for negative overheads, which his did not. man tc-stab has clear and good explanations and examples. SFQ - well it''s literally been years since I knew it in detail, but limit was (back then at least) for all flows combined. I tested (maybe not hard enough) quantum < mtu and never managed to prevent dequeues - I know it''s not efficient and "forbiden" but back then at least it didn''t break. Anyway it seems that early this year SFQ got some love and now has several more options (red, headdrop, limit >127, depth as param) - so as long as your iproute/kernel is current have a look at man tc-sfq for details. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Andy Furniss wrote:> I tested (maybe not hard enough) quantum < mtu and never managed to > prevent dequeues - I know it''s not efficient and "forbiden" but back > then at least it didn''t break.Forgot to say - also remember mtu as seen by tc on eth has 14 added - default quantum on sfq, htb etc are 1514 as you can see with tc -s -d qdisc ls etc.
On Sat, 2012-06-02 at 15:37 +0100, Andy Furniss wrote:> > Anyway it seems that early this year SFQ got some love and now has > several more options (red, headdrop, limit >127, depth as param) - so as > long as your iproute/kernel is current have a look at man tc-sfq for > details.Yes, but fq_codel is really better than SFQ.
Eric Dumazet wrote:> On Sat, 2012-06-02 at 15:37 +0100, Andy Furniss wrote: > >> >> Anyway it seems that early this year SFQ got some love and now has >> several more options (red, headdrop, limit>127, depth as param) - so as >> long as your iproute/kernel is current have a look at man tc-sfq for >> details. > > Yes, but fq_codel is really better than SFQ.Ooh, that does look interesting. I hadn''t seen that, thanks. I should really start checking netdev again. Just pulled iproute git, and see there is a man for codel, but not fq_codel (yet?). It would be handy if it/them were added to man tc''s "SEE ALSO" section. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html