similar to: Low-priority traffic

Hi all, ive got 2 internet connections set up via the nano howto (which are working great) and we are running NAT. Was looking in to qos mainly to stop large http downloads/ftp downloads from hogging the line so that browsing for other users doesnt slow to a crawl, but if the line is free and no one is doing anything then for it to use the available bandwith. The wondershaper sounded exactly what

Hi folks, I''m trying to shape two clients in my LAN when accessing the internet. Actual situation is that EVERY traffic goes into 1:40, so the client which should fall into 1:30 does not get the lower uplink it should have, but the uplink defined for the client defined as 1:30 When I disable the definition of 1:40, every traffic falls into 1:30 (except for the traffic defined to be in

I''m trying to setup traffic shaping on my linux gateway/router. The system has 3 interfaces: eth0 - My LAN - with IP address 192.168.0.254 eth1 - The ethernet connection to which my ADSL modem is connected. This has a 10.25.x.x IP, more on this later. The ADSL link has an upstream of ~1.2mbit. ppp0 - The PPP connection which is my WAN connection, with a real world IP. The system acts

Greetings, My question deals with the htb version of wonder shaper. I used it for some time without much alteration except I noticed something odd in the way the rates are set up for the 3 htb classes. The way I understand it, there are 3 classes: 1:10 - high prio class with rate ${UPLINK}kbit 1:20 - bulk/default class with rate $[9*$UPLINK/10]kbit 1:30 - bulk/default low priority

Is there a way to apply wondershaper w/ htb to a port range? I have a ftp server on port 65432 and passive ports 50000-60000. Is there a way to set a range? or do they have to be individually listed? The following doesnt seem to work: # low priority source ports NOPRIOPORTSRC=65432, 50000:60000 # low priority destination ports NOPRIOPORTDST= Mark

Hi! I''m trying to limit the uplink bandwidth using htb but no packets are overlimit or dropped. :-( My router config: * Linux kernel 2.4.20-pre10 (htb v3.7) with everything built as modules in QoS, iptables in use. * tc binary from htb3.6-020525.tgz * external interface eth0: Internet access, 512 kbit/s uplink speed * internal interface eth1: internal LAN, 100 Mbit/s The hosts in the

Hi All, I''m using iptables-1.2.7a on RedHat8 kernel 2.4.20. I wanted to limit the file-sharing traffic to the internet. I marked the packets with iptables: iptables -A FORWARD -t mangle -p tcp -s 192.168.1.1/24 -d ! 192.168.1.1/24 --dport 1024:1862 -j MARK --set-mark 1 iptables -A FORWARD -t mangle -p tcp -s 192.168.1.1/24 -d ! 192.168.1.1/24 --dport 1864:65535 -j MARK --set-mark 1

tc class add dev $DEV parent 1: classid 1:1 htb rate ${UPLINK}kbit burst 6k tc qdisc add dev $DEV handle ffff: ingress tc filter add dev $DEV parent ffff: protocol ip prio 50 u32 match ip src \ 0.0.0.0/0 police rate ${DOWNLINK}kbit burst 10k drop flowid :1 why does the download is being sent to class 1 which is limited by uplink ? why the rate is being mentioned in filter and in class ?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all! when I activate wondershaper on my dsl connection (pppoa vc mux), i get three errors: # sh -x /usr/sbin/wshaper ppp0 + /usr/sbin/xmlstarter setenv tc_downlink + DOWNLINK= + /usr/sbin/xmlstarter setenv tc_uplink + UPLINK= + [ -z ] + cat /proc/avalanche/avsar_modem_stats + grep Connection Rate + awk {printf("%d", $8)} +

I''m trying to build a QoS system that would divide the outgoing traffic into four categories, each one also subdivided into two more categories. For that I chose a htb root qdisc subdivided into four classes, each of these classes contains also a htb qdisc. Until these point everything goes well, but when I try to attach a new class to the leaf htb qdisc a problem with the sintaxis

Hello Thilo, What did you find superior with CBQ-wondershaper over HTB-wondershaper? We have not been using wondershaper specifically but our simple tests so far seem to show that htb is much easier to configure for a given target shape (i.,e accurate) compared to CBQ. Torsten -----Original Message----- From: Thilo Schulz [mailto:arny@ats.s.bawue.de] Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 8:55 AM To:

Hi, When i do ''wshaper start'' the interface i have defined stops routing traffic for some reason. It resumes routing when i do ''wshaper stop''. I''m using debian stable (3.0 woody) with debian''s default 2.4.18-686 kernel. When I run the script I get no errors, and when I do a ''status'', everything looks correct. Can ANYONE

Dear friends: I was analizing the HTB script at "The ultimate traffic conditioner", at the Cookbook, at Lartc. I have a very basic question: First, it is defined the root htb qdisc, as expected; then, it is defined the main (parent) htb class, with the total uplink as rate, also as expected; then, they are defined 2 child clases: first of them has also the total uplink as rate (!)

Season Greetings to all Tom, in your faq, u have this noted: While I am currently using the HTB version of The Wonder Shaper (I just copied wshaper.htb to /etc/shorewall/tcstart and modified it as shown in the Wondershaper README), I treid this with wondershaper, using Bearing Leaf 1.0 stable i even changed the tc command to run_tc, and tried it in both angles, and i receive the following..

Hello, I’ve read this Article avout VOIP and HFSC http://automatthias.wordpress.com/2006/06/30/hfsc-and-voip/ I’ve got few questions ? Considering this tc class add dev $DEV parent 1:1 classid 1:2 hfsc \ rt m1 ${UPLINK}kbit d 50ms m2 $[1*$UPLINK/10]kbit \ ls m1 ${UPLINK}kbit d 50ms m2 $[3*$UPLINK/10]kbit \ ul rate ${UPLINK}kbit rt = realtime curve ls = linksharing curve but m1 = ? m2 = ? d =

Hi, I have a typical configuration for my firewall/gateway box: single network card, with a pppoe connection to the DSL modem. I''m already successfully shaping the uplink (how come that the wondershaper.htb doesn''t use the ceil parameter? It should implement bandwidth borrowing!) but i found the ingress policy a little bit rough. I''d like to keep the traffic categories

Thanks for the tips Brian, Actually, I have many sorts of links, line PPOE ADSL, PPPOA ADSL which a use PPTP over PPOA relay, radio links that connect in the ethernet interface and cable modems. To change the SFQ queue size I must recompile de kernel? I think a saw some messages talking about that. One other thing, I have the 1:10 a 1:20 class, let''s assume there is no

I''m trying to shape traffic on a Devil-Linux box. This note was originally sent to their maillist, because the LARTC list appears to have been down for the past few days. My mailbox was just flooded with a half dozen or so confirmation requests in response to my repeated attempts to subscribe to this list. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: drew einhorn

Hello, I am trying wondershaper-1.1a on a friend''s pppoe connection on her Linux box. There are a few things I don''t understand. 1. She has pppoe connection so should DEV=eth0 or DEV=ppp0 ? 2. Her ISP just says on her payment bill that the speed is 128kbps, but doesn''t mention any downlink/uplink speed, so in that case what should be, DOWNLINK= and UPLINK= ? 3. She

Did anyone ever answer this one? THIS is what I am trying to do: >[LARTC] cbq+sfq and DSCP marking >Maria Joana Urbano stmaria@dei.uc.pt >Thu, 13 Feb 2003 19:29:42 +0000 > > * Previous message: [LARTC] Monitoring.... > * Next message: [LARTC] two routes 1 network card > * Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] >