similar to: Fwd: police burst is mandatory?

I am currently using the ultimate-tc script from http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.cookbook.ultimate-tc.html and I want to make sure that internet radio packets (mp3 streaming audio) will always get through no matter what. I have added some iptables commands like this: iptables -A OUTPUT -t mangle -p tcp --dport 8000 -j TOS --set-tos Minimize-Delay iptables -A OUTPUT -t mangle -p tcp --sport 8000 -j

I would like to test police in ingress. I use kernel 2.4.20. I use this configuration: iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -s 10.31.12.2 -d 10.31.11.2 -p udp --dport 1001 -j MARK --set-mark 1 iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -s 10.31.12.2 -d 10.31.11.2 -p udp --dport 1002 -j MARK --set-mark 2 iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -s 10.31.12.2 -d 10.31.11.2 -p udp --dport 1003 -j

I am trying to build the latest release candidate and have run into a bit of a problem. When I run ./configure, I get: GlusterFS configure summary =========================== FUSE client : no Infiniband verbs : no epoll IO multiplex : yes Berkeley-DB : no libglusterfsclient : yes mod_glusterfs : no () argp-standalone : no I am going to need the gluster FUSE client now

Hi. I'm evaluating GlusterFS for our DFS implementation, and wondered how it compares to KFS/CloudStore? These features here look especially nice ( http://kosmosfs.sourceforge.net/features.html). Any idea what of them exist in GlusterFS as well? Regards. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

I tried installing the WonderShaper on my internal link, mostly to get the SFQ installed. I set uplink and downlink to 100000 to match the link speed and changed the bandwidth on the cbq line to 100mbit. This killed transfer speed *to* the box, knocking it from 30-40 Mbps down to about 800 kbps. Commenting out just the ingress control restored the speed. What about the ingress policer would do

Hi. We look to switch from XenServer, as it latest versions do not run on our eserver xSeries 336 server. Does the XCP 1.1 fully support this hardware? Also, any idea how well the Xen tools, such as XenCenter and Xen HW->VM tools supported in 1.1 release? I seen there is a feature called XAPI that makes the XCP look as fully-featured XenServer. Thanks.

Hi, all I''ve got problems with tc qdisc ingress. I''m using vanillia kernel 2.6.14.4 patched with http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/routes-2.6.14-12.diff, and iproute2-2.6.14-051107. i am using ingress to limit incoming traffic : (DEV is eth1 / DOWNLINK is 7700) # attach ingress policer: tc qdisc add dev $DEV handle ffff: ingress # filter *everything* to it (0.0.0.0/0), drop everything

Dear all, I''m having real problems getting tc to do anything useful at all. I''m also under pressure to get this fixed before the students start arriving later this month (I work in a university). In short, I want each IP address to be hard limited to 128kbit down, 64kbit up, never to be allowed more bandwidth than this. It is also important that the latency remains

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 ?

Hi, I am trying to do some simple ingress limiting based on fwmark. I know the ability and sense to do INGRESS limiting is ehm... limited ;-) but still I want to try it. I tried several things. === 1 === tcq ingress handle ffff: tcf parent ffff: protocol ip prio 1 handle 1 fw police rate 12mbit burst 10k drop tcf parent ffff: protocol ip prio 1 handle 2 fw police rate 10mbit burst 10k drop

Hi. Have anyone ever managed several geographically distributed systems with Puppet? I have several almost exactly similar deployments (except the server IP''s), which management I''m looking to convert to Puppet. I have 2 options: * Have each deployment to host it''s own PuppetMaster for providing local configurations, then synchronize somehow the PuppetMasters (maybe

I have a setup where I have three NIC in a Debian box. I have eth1 conected to internet and eth0 NAT''ed to 192.168.1.1. eth1 and eth2 are bridged together, given ip 192.168.122.2. What I want to achieve is to perform traffic shaping on the bridge as well as prioritizing the traffic from eth0 very low. (This is from trental flat ...) However it seems that I am unable to perform thhe

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

Hi, What is the difference between the rate values you specify in "tc class ... htb ... rate ..." and in "tc filter ... police ... rate ..."? Thanks in advance. Best regards. -- Value your freedom, or you will lose it, teaches history. ``Don''t bother us with politics,'''' respond those who don''t want to learn. -- Richard M. Stallman

Currently, linux tc has very useful concept of a ''index'' for a given policy. However, I need to have policers on multiple hosts to share the same index (and thus, know and police the aggregate traffic across a set of routers). I''d like to be able to share tc policers across a set of boxes. Unfortunately, I''m not knowledgeable enough myself to implement that,

Hi there good people, I''m a newbie in what concerns running Linux on machines other than desktops, so I need help from all you gurus out there :-) I have Linux installed on an old computer (Winchip C6, Pentium clone), acting as a router/firewall for two other computers. Both these machines are connected to the firewall via a dedicated ethernet card each, on different subnets,

Hi, I notice that if two or more existing connections match an ingress policing filter, the input bandwidth does not get evenly divided up between the n connections. Kinda like litters of baby animals, where the stronger babies get more access to the mothers teats and grow up bigger and faster than their siblings. The only workaround that''s working for me is to set explicit ingress

Hi ! I wanted to shape my analog modem connection so I took these two lines from the ''wondershaper'' script: 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} burst 10k drop flowid :1 with DEV=ppp0 and DOWNLINK=24kbit. But, when I activate it, nothing comes back from the

[I sent this earlier but I guess the list is subscriber-only?] I just set up wondershaper, it has a simple filter on the downstream direction to limit the bandwidth usage: 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 This is effective but is there any way to

Hi everyone, I''m new to tc but I need to use it to set up shaping on a new NAT box. In short: Each user must have their upload limited to 128kbit and downlink limited to 256kbit. Global bandwidth to be limited to 100Mbit Interactive packets to have higher priority 200+ users, so need to match packets fast So far I have managed to get the download limits working. However I need to