hi,
i am trying to have bandwidth shaping on my linux router.
i have a 64kbps link, on which i want to restrict the link use for http
/ftp access and give more bandwidth priority for vpn access. thanks to
martin devera i am using the htb for this.
|-----------| |-----------|
| MAIN LINK |-----+------| CLASS A |
|-----------| | |-----------|
|
|------+-----|
| CLASS B |
|------------|
MAIN LINK = 64kbps
CLASS A = 24kbps (for HTTP/ FTP and other internet related activities )
CLASS B = 40kbps ( reserved for PPTP-VPN access incoming and outgoing)
requirements :
each class should be able to borrow bandwidth from the other class when
excess is available
incoming vpn connections should come through the class B bandwidth policy
outgoing vpn connections should go through the class B bandwidth policy
following is the command set (lifted from the htb manual :-) ) i am
trying to use :
# tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: htb default 11
# tc class add dev eth0 parent 1: classid 1:1 htb rate 64kbps ceil 64
kbps burst 2k
# tc class add dev eth0 parent 1: classid 1:10 htb rate 64kbps ceil 64
kbps burst 2k
# tc class add dev eth0 parent 1: classid 1:11 htb rate 64kbps ceil 64
kbps burst 2k
# tc filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 1 u32 match ip src
192.168.1.0 match tcp dst 21 0xffff flowid \ 1:10
# tc filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 1 u32 match ip src
192.168.1.0 match tcp dst 80 0xffff flowid \ 1:10
# tc filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 1 u32 match ip src
192.168.1.0 match tcp dst 443 0xffff flowid \ 1:10
# tc qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:10 handle 20: pfifo limit 5
# tc qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:11 handle 30: sfq perturb 10
first i would like to know whether what i have done is correct or not in
context with my problem , i think i am on right track ?
why i did what i did
now to meet the above requirements what i did was to define bandwidth
shaping only for http, https & ftp (the major bandwidth guzzlers to
class A and made the class B as default.
but because of above rulesets my other inet services (like domain, ssh,
whois, ping etc) will go through the default policy of class B, which i
want to avoid without adding additional rulesets; can i define a ruleset
for VPN something like below : (and remove the rulesets for class A
and make clas A as default)
# tc filter add dev eth0 protocol 47 parent 1:0 prio 1 u32 match ip src
192.168.1.0 flowid 1:11
# tc filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 1 u32 match ip src
192.168.1.0 match tcp dst 1723 0xffff \
flowid 1:11
but how do i define the ruleset for incoming connections, can the
following be true
# tc filter add dev eth0 protocol 47 parent 1:0 prio 1 u32 match ip dst
192.168.1.0 flowid 1:11
# tc filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 1 u32 match ip dst
192.168.1.0 match tcp dst 1723 0xffff \
flowid 1:11
thanx in advance
regards / shekhar
I have not too much time to read it just now. But just wondering if you really want 64kbps or rather 64kbit ? devik On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Chandrashekhar Joshi wrote:> hi, > > i am trying to have bandwidth shaping on my linux router. > i have a 64kbps link, on which i want to restrict the link use for http....> MAIN LINK = 64kbps > CLASS A = 24kbps (for HTTP/ FTP and other internet related activities ) > CLASS B = 40kbps ( reserved for PPTP-VPN access incoming and outgoing)
yes it is 64kbps (actually it is 256kbits so i suppose that works out to 64kbps right) thanks regards /shekhar Martin Devera wrote:>I have not too much time to read it just now. But just wondering >if you really want 64kbps or rather 64kbit ? >devik > >On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Chandrashekhar Joshi wrote: > >>hi, >> >>i am trying to have bandwidth shaping on my linux router. >>i have a 64kbps link, on which i want to restrict the link use for http >> >.... > >>MAIN LINK = 64kbps >>CLASS A = 24kbps (for HTTP/ FTP and other internet related activities ) >>CLASS B = 40kbps ( reserved for PPTP-VPN access incoming and outgoing) >> > > > >
I don''t understand it .. 256kbit = 32kbps. Why do you use 64kbps !? On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Chandrashekhar Joshi wrote:> yes it is 64kbps (actually it is 256kbits so i suppose that works out to > 64kbps right) > > thanks > regards /shekhar > > Martin Devera wrote: > > >I have not too much time to read it just now. But just wondering > >if you really want 64kbps or rather 64kbit ? > >devik > > > >On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Chandrashekhar Joshi wrote: > > > >>hi, > >> > >>i am trying to have bandwidth shaping on my linux router. > >>i have a 64kbps link, on which i want to restrict the link use for http > >> > >.... > > > >>MAIN LINK = 64kbps > >>CLASS A = 24kbps (for HTTP/ FTP and other internet related activities ) > >>CLASS B = 40kbps ( reserved for PPTP-VPN access incoming and outgoing) > >> > > > > > > > > > >
On Monday 14 January 2002 13:52, Martin Devera wrote:> I don''t understand it .. 256kbit = 32kbps. Why > do you use 64kbps !?No, 256kbit is 256kb/s is 32KB/s. Lowercase means bits, uppercase means bytes. Rob -- Rob Kaper - rkaper@ism.nl phone - +31 10 2436060 fax - +31 10 2436066 cell - +31 64 7114454
Are sure ? I''m speaking in tc terms .. On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Rob Kaper wrote:> On Monday 14 January 2002 13:52, Martin Devera wrote: > > I don''t understand it .. 256kbit = 32kbps. Why > > do you use 64kbps !? > > No, 256kbit is 256kb/s is 32KB/s. > > Lowercase means bits, uppercase means bytes. > > Rob > -- > Rob Kaper - rkaper@ism.nl > phone - +31 10 2436060 > fax - +31 10 2436066 > cell - +31 64 7114454 > > >
On Monday 14 January 2002 14:01, Martin Devera wrote:> Are sure ? I''m speaking in tc terms ..Hm, I''m speaking in human terms. ;-) It''s what I (and most others) would expect anyway.> > No, 256kbit is 256kb/s is 32KB/s.Rob -- Rob Kaper - rkaper@ism.nl phone - +31 10 2436060 fax - +31 10 2436066 cell - +31 64 7114454
> On Monday 14 January 2002 14:01, Martin Devera wrote: > > Are sure ? I''m speaking in tc terms .. > > Hm, I''m speaking in human terms. ;-)I know. I don''t assume that Joshi is fool so that I don''t try to explain him difference between bit and byte. I wrote the mail because kbit and kbps are different terms in tc and despite being in FAQ users still don''t understand it. devik
hi, yes it was a small oops in calculation, (or was it a big one :-) ) but back to the main theme are my rulesets correct ??? shekhar Rob Kaper wrote:>On Monday 14 January 2002 14:01, Martin Devera wrote: > >>Are sure ? I''m speaking in tc terms .. >> >Hm, I''m speaking in human terms. ;-) > >It''s what I (and most others) would expect anyway. > >>>No, 256kbit is 256kb/s is 32KB/s. >>> > >Rob >
Hi there,
Is it possible to somehow have a fairly basic routing level in order to
forward packets from eth1 to eth0? Simply using "route"?
I have a Cisco that has a local network IP. It is on eth0 interface. I
have a Switch on eth1. I want to supply eth1 with a Real World IP which
comes through the Cisco.
Any guidance available?
I assigned 10.0.0.2 on eth0 and 210.54.149.189 on eth1.
then I did this:
route add -net 10.0.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 10.0.0.1 dev eth0
route add -net 210.54.149.160 netmask 255.255.255.224 gw 10.0.0.1 (which
says network unreachable)
Could someone please tell me how I could solve this?
Regards,
Sahil Gupta
NET4U Limited
------------------------------------
NET4U -- www.net4u.co.nz
Home of the new - $24.95 128k ADSL
Nationwide Internet Service Provider
------------------------------------
Yes is seems to be. On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Chandrashekhar Joshi wrote:> hi, > yes it was a small oops in calculation, (or was it a big one :-) ) but > back to the main theme are my rulesets correct ??? > > shekhar > > > Rob Kaper wrote: > > >On Monday 14 January 2002 14:01, Martin Devera wrote: > > > >>Are sure ? I''m speaking in tc terms .. > >> > >Hm, I''m speaking in human terms. ;-) > > > >It''s what I (and most others) would expect anyway. > > > >>>No, 256kbit is 256kb/s is 32KB/s. > >>> > > > >Rob > > >