Can anyone help?? _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Lenthir wrote:> Hi everybody! > > I wrote nice script, but I need some help.... > Script is working almost well. > > My question is: > Can I minimalize PING time more than this script can? (nowadays is > 70-150ms with large load of link) > My first problem is - unreal big PING on router, and almost excellent > (nowadays is 70-150ms) PING on computers in network. > > My users don''t complain, but I noticed that the pages is becoming load > quickly and when it''s almost done.. the transfer is going down!! > And second symptom is: when I open pages PING grows to 800ms, and > quickly go down. It''s almost imperceptible, but it happens. > What''s wrong? All packets is going to correct pipes. What should I do more? > I suspect, that time of change of speed (HTB''s reaction time) many > queues is long. How can I improve this?It''s a big script - I only looked briefly and may have missed things. Shaping inbound traffic from the wrong end of the bottleneck is hard, HTB would need to be predictive to do it better. For SFQ you can change queue length (SFQ_DEPTH) in net/sched/sch_sfq.c or you could use esfq and choose length with options. How many users do you have? If you have 2mbit link then I think you need to reduce the ceils or you won''t have a queue to shape with.> Script is very nice, but I need some professional help and advices. > > Everything You can check when script is working: > ./htb0.5.3en stat <IP> (example: ./htb0.5.3en stat 192.168.0.2) > ./htb0.5.3en stat lan > ./htb0.5.3en stats > > My network''s statistics: > http://stats.opat.hopto.org/ > http://stats.zabierzow.net/ > > I attached my script. IMQ with imq_nat.diff patch is required (or AB > option in kernels 2.6), patched iptables(IMQ patch) is required, iproute > is required and bc is required. I tested this script on 2.6.9 kernel and > iproute from .deb package. > > And second less important problem... How Can I mark squid''s MISS > packets? Is Debian''s Squid Package patched to change TOS? > http://stats.zabierzow.net/squid.php :dI assume a miss is traffic squid gets from the net, if unshaped this will make you go overlimits - so is not neccessarily just a secondary problem. If you are NATing and have IMQ hooking after NAT in PREROUTING then traffic headed for squid will still have your real IP and forwarded local IP. You need to use u32 to seperate it. Andy.> Someone will help?_______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Andy Furniss wrote:> It''s a big script - I only looked briefly and may have missed things.> Shaping inbound traffic from the wrong end of the bottleneck is hard, > HTB would need to be predictive to do it better.So what should I change?> For SFQ you can change queue length (SFQ_DEPTH) in net/sched/sch_sfq.c > or you could use esfq and choose length with options.I made this. SFQ_DEPTH was changed from 128 to 16.> How many users do you have?I have 58 users and it will be more...> If you have 2mbit link then I think you need to reduce the ceils or you > won''t have a queue to shape with.I tested real speed - without packet queue (minimum ping, maximum transfer). I have 2mbit link but 2Mbit for download and 256kbit for upload. 2000kbits without queue (even more:P)... and 220 upload without queue.> I assume a miss is traffic squid gets from the net, if unshaped this > will make you go overlimits - so is not neccessarily just a secondary > problem.Squid is switched off. I will not use, as long as I will not make filters.> If you are NATing and have IMQ hooking after NAT in PREROUTING then > traffic headed for squid will still have your real IP and forwarded > local IP. You need to use u32 to seperate it.Can You tell me how? Thanks for answer. I thought, that nobody will write. _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Lenthir wrote:> > > Andy Furniss wrote: > >> It''s a big script - I only looked briefly and may have missed things. > > >> Shaping inbound traffic from the wrong end of the bottleneck is hard, >> HTB would need to be predictive to do it better. > > So what should I change? > >> For SFQ you can change queue length (SFQ_DEPTH) in net/sched/sch_sfq.c >> or you could use esfq and choose length with options. > > I made this. SFQ_DEPTH was changed from 128 to 16. > >> How many users do you have? > > I have 58 users and it will be more...Hmm - if I had to do this many users on 2meg I would consider a different approach. Assuming I read the script correcty, you are putting interactive traffic whithin each users share so there will be times when you delay while others get their rate. The way I do it is to have a class with a high rate and high prio for interactive - but I do not do per user fairness on it - only on bulk traffic. Doing this with lots of users will mean you really have to be careful about not letting bulk into interactive class. It also means that a user could get more than there share of the link by having bulk and interactive traffic. As a policy the Idea that on a highly contended link interactive should get > than fair share at any time is attractive to me as a gamer. It means that users that 24/7 download / browsers can''t leave me with so little bandwidth that gaming is impossible. If you want to do things so that interactive takes from bulk per user and keeps low latency you will need to look at HFSC.> >> If you have 2mbit link then I think you need to reduce the ceils or >> you won''t have a queue to shape with. > > I tested real speed - without packet queue (minimum ping, maximum > transfer). > > I have 2mbit link but 2Mbit for download and 256kbit for upload. > 2000kbits without queue (even more:P)... and 220 upload without queue.You need to back off a bit from the inbound link speed so that a queue builds up. There are other tweaks I would do but will post later when I know what you do/use. What sort of DSL do you use (pppoa or e etc) and can you get a cell count out of the modem?> >> I assume a miss is traffic squid gets from the net, if unshaped this >> will make you go overlimits - so is not neccessarily just a secondary >> problem. > > Squid is switched off. I will not use, as long as I will not make filters. > >> If you are NATing and have IMQ hooking after NAT in PREROUTING then >> traffic headed for squid will still have your real IP and forwarded >> local IP. You need to use u32 to seperate it. > > Can You tell me how?I think it should work OK as you do in the script with u32 for local IPs.> > Thanks for answer. I thought, that nobody will write. > _______________________________________________ > LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl > http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ >_______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/