LARTC - Jun 2003 - traffic controlling strategy

Hello all,

I have a simple question. Assuming a gateway has two interfaces (eth0 in
local network and eth1 in outside network), for traffic
controlling/shaping  in two directions (inbound&outbound) using a this
(dedicated) gateway  which is the best strategy:

1/ using default outbound shaping  on eth1 (outside interface) for
outgoing and outbound shaping on eth0 (inside interface) for incoming
2/  using default outbound shaping  on eth1 (outside interface) for
outgoing and inbound shaping (with IMQ) on eth1 (outside interface) for
incoming
...
Which combination do you recommand? Any reason for your recommandation?

Thanks,

Alex

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

* alexandru matei <alex@qb.ro>:
> 1/ using default outbound shaping  on eth1 (outside interface) for
> outgoing and outbound shaping on eth0 (inside interface) for incoming
> 2/  using default outbound shaping  on eth1 (outside interface) for
> outgoing and inbound shaping (with IMQ) on eth1 (outside interface) for
> incoming
> ...
> Which combination do you recommand? Any reason for your recommandation?
I have the same problem and thinking of an third strategy:

3/ Splitting the outside interface into two virtual interfaces: eth0:0
for incoming, eth0:1 for outgoing traffic and routing the two interfaces
that both traffic seems to go out of the interface.

Bad english maybe, but probably totally wrong, too.

Kai
-- 
* mail kai.weber@glorybox.de
  web http://www.glorybox.de
  pgp 0x594D4132
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

Shaping is done on the physical device irrespective of number of virtual
interface unless there is a specific virtual device support in kernel like
for IMQ. Best option would be to shape traffic on eth1 and eth0. Activate
policing for ingress queue on eth0 (external interface). Queue builds up for
incoming on linux box for incoming traffic.

Reason for this, no change/ recompilation of kernel required. Stable (look
at recent post on IMQ bug fix). IMQ need be used only if you want to
control/cap aggregated incoming and outgoing bandwidth and not control them
individually.

Mohan

-----Original Message-----
From: lartc-admin@mailman.ds9a.nl [mailto:lartc-admin@mailman.ds9a.nl]On
Behalf Of Kai Weber
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 6:20 PM
To: lartc
Subject: Re: [LARTC] traffic controlling strategy


* alexandru matei <alex@qb.ro>:
> 1/ using default outbound shaping  on eth1 (outside interface) for
> outgoing and outbound shaping on eth0 (inside interface) for incoming
> 2/  using default outbound shaping  on eth1 (outside interface) for
> outgoing and inbound shaping (with IMQ) on eth1 (outside interface) for
> incoming
> ...
> Which combination do you recommand? Any reason for your recommandation?
I have the same problem and thinking of an third strategy:

3/ Splitting the outside interface into two virtual interfaces: eth0:0
for incoming, eth0:1 for outgoing traffic and routing the two interfaces
that both traffic seems to go out of the interface.

Bad english maybe, but probably totally wrong, too.

Kai
--
* mail kai.weber@glorybox.de
  web http://www.glorybox.de
  pgp 0x594D4132
_______________________________________________
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/