similar to: -p real time priority and -U together

hello everyone good day, im just new here, good day just wanna ask ... i want to priotize voip ports first before anything else, with the PRIO below which is 0 is it necessary or ill just put the filter of rtsp protocol to prio 3 instead of 0 .... thanks, does the priority differs from class / ip address / filter etc ? ex: class prio 0 1 2 3 4 thanks, - stephanie here is my partial sample

How to list real-time priority in Linux for an application (example asterisk)? -- #Joseph

I''m trying to build a wan latency test environment, where packets from different "remote" locations get delayed by different amounts of time, depending on which remote location we''re pretending they are from. Currently, I''m doing this using the ''prio'' qdisc to obtain multiple bands, and hanging a different netem qdisc off each of the branches

I''m trying to configure 4 queues with strict priorities based on DSCP. I tried to following commands, but it seems that the filters I defined have no effect tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: prio bands 4 tc qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:0 handle 10: pfifo limit 100 tc qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:1 handle 20: pfifo limit 100 tc qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:2 handle 30: pfifo limit 100 tc

Hi. I am trying to bend my brain around ''tc'' and friends and am failing so far. I need to set up a bridge which limits the packet rate to 2000 packets/s, but with the added twist that packets with a certain DSCP value must be given absolute priority in both directions. The packet rate limit thing appears to be easy: brcfg addbr br0 brcfg addif br0 eth0 brcfg addif br0 eth1

Hi, I am currently working on the TC. I have seen some behaviour which seems to be odd. I know someone in the mailing list would have seen this problem or may have some fix for this problem. When I try to include u32 filters with different priority or pref, I could see the filters being set on all the priority''s irrespective of the priority number. See my sample script below and the

Hello, I''m a total tc newbie, and I''m trying to tweak the wondershaper script (http://lartc.org/wondershaper/) to get a slightly different result. Excuse me if I will not use the correct technical terms, it''s a whole new world to me :) wondershaper.htb creates 3 HTB classes; 1:10 is high prio, 1:20 is bulk (default), and 1:30 is low priority. The classes are

hi all friends has tc filter an priority of rules , like iptables, let me explain it : with iptables, when the packet find a rule to go, it doesnt see the rest of rules, and how is the behavior of tc filter ?? see it : one packet from 10.10.10.1:2421 going to 11.11.11.1:110 what rule above it will be shaped ?? 1 ) tc filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 1 u32 match ip src

Hello i''m having some issues trying to match packets using iptables mark, iproute filter and tc filter.- i mean, when i do iptables -t mangle -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j MARK --set-mark 20 iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -p tcp --dport 25 -j MARK --set-mark 10 iptables -t mangle -A FORWARD -p tcp -i eth0 -o eth1 --dport 25 -j MARK --set-mark 10 $TC qdisc del dev $INET_IFACE root $TC

In the past when I said: ebtables -A INPUT -p 0x828 -j DROP !!DOES NOT WORK!! ebtables -A INPUT -p 0x800 -j DROP !!WORKS!! Group members told me that: > What you need to do is register your function > on the existing NF_BR_PRE_ROUTING hook, with a priority number lower than > that of the ebtables nat PREROUTING chain (prio=NF_BR_PRI_NAT_SRC). ebt INPUT | | ebt

hello... 1. Is it possible using u32 to filter marked packets? I have found only documents to fw filter to filter marked packets... 2. If u32 cannot filter marked packets is it possible to use fw and u32 together? I wanted to filter packets marked by iptables by fw, and packets depended on ip destination, src and others by u32, but something goes wrong :( the filters configuration is: $TC

Hi, I''ve failed miserably in my endeavours so far and I''m at the point where help would be much appreciated. I want to have 3 bandwidth limited classes on my Internet interface. In each of those classes I want 3 prioritization bands, and then use "tc filters" to place the traffic into the correct class and priority. The problem is that the traffic

Hello all, I am trying to make a filter into my QoS rules and I founded that when I try to use filters u32 and with fwmark they do not work together. This is the filter I use, just and example, for u32: $TC filter add dev $DL parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 u32 match ip sport 22 0xffff flowid 1:10 This is working fine. Now if I try to mark a package that I want it to go to the same

Hi, I have recently started to use ''tc'' on ipv6 traffic and have come across an issue with tc filter. As per tc_filter.c in iproute2-050816, to match ''priority'' of an ipv6 packet, the u32 filter matches against the first 8 bits of the packet. From f_u32.c: if (strcmp(*argv, "priority") == 0) { NEXT_ARG();

Hi, I have several users on the lanside each allocated separate IP addresses. I need to allocate th traffic to each IP addresses certain portion of total uplink. Say, 192.168.0.2 rate 128kbps, ceil 128kbps. 192.168.0.3 rate 65kbps, ceil 128kbps 129.168.0.4 rate 64kbps, ceil 64kbps. and so on.... Also, for each user i would like to prioritize the traffic within the allocated bandwidth. say for

Hi, In the article Hierachical token bucket theory says that "Just look at the self feed list and select the nonempty slot (one with a line) with lowest level and highest prio." Then I wonder that if the highest priority class is always in the "CAN SENT" mode, the other classes will have less opportuinity to send packet? Becase they have to wait the hightest priority class

Hi. I''m trying to get a traffic shaper like this: ------ VoIP pkts --> | |_| ------ \ | ---O -> ------ / Data pkts --> | ------ In this shaper voip packets are in a different queue than any other kind of packet. I want a data packet to be

Hello to all people there . Can i guarantee ICMP respond time no metter how loaded is internet line . i have typical NATed enviroiment like External IP |linux router| LAN - 192.168.0.0/24 i have example setup with IMQ but is it possible to be done also if i attache htb to eth0 and eth1 for example . if i start shaper ping i better that without shaper but it''s not guarantted i mean

Anyone ever noticed that the reported holdtime is wrong when there are different priorities? Also talktime is 0, but for the moment I don't care. "queue show test" reports: test has 23 calls (max unlimited) in 'ringall' strategy (193s holdtime, 0s talktime) [...] Callers: 1. Local/351 at default-8828;2 (wait: 3:32, prio: 15) 2. Local/351 at default-8361;2

Greetings list folk.. I have been reading up on QOS for a short time now with the idea of solving one problem I have but I cant seem to piece together a working system to do so. I have a linux box acting as a home gateway system running Gentoo and vanilla 2.4.26. I have a vonage uhh voip device that is connected behind the router. There are only 3-4 other hosts on the network. All I really