similar to: Equalize traffic within 1 class.

Hello, I haven''t been keeping up with sending ESFQ [ANNOUNCE] messages to this list, but I''ve still been working on the patch. If you''re curious about recent changes, take a look at the home page, ChangeLog, and README: http://fatooh.org/esfq-2.6/ http://fatooh.org/esfq-2.6/current/ChangeLog http://fatooh.org/esfq-2.6/current/README Meanwhile, I''m interested

http://fatooh.org/esfq-2.6/ http://fatooh.org/esfq-2.6/esfq-2.6.12-rc1.tar.gz This version no longer interferes with the original SFQ; unlike previous versions, you can still use an unpatched tc with SFQ. Patching tc is still needed for ESFQ, though. I''ve tested this patch with Linux 2.6.11 as well. Please tell me if you have any problems. I''m subscribed to lartc again. -Corey

Hello, there''s a problem I''ve had for several months now, and I''ve never been able to find an answer to it. I''ll try to explain as quick as possible: I have a server that controlls my home network, it provides internet to them also (NAT) and I would like to provide QoS by shaping traffic. I have a p2p server here (running mldonkey), since only that

The limit parameter for SFQ qdiscs isn''t listed in the howto. Based on a mail from this list from 4 may 2002 ("SFQ queue lengths - generalization"), I''d guess it limits the number of packets/bytes in in the queue, but wether it does so by number of bytes, packets, or time spent in the queue I don''t know. Perhaps someone in the know could add a line to the

Dear list: I have a problem I cannot handle yet, and need to solve it as soon as possible. Would be very greatful with anybody who can help me. I have a 512/512 link to internet, that I want to share between several computers. I have eth0, with a public IP address, conected to Internet, and also, eth1, with a private IP address, for network with the surfing computers. I have a main class with

I''m grappling with a problem that looks like sfq is not working (packets don''t get fairly queued, they appear to be always sent FIFO). My configuration appears to be correct. The machine is running quite an old kernel and if I could convince myself that the sfq code it has is just broken, I''d spend the time to upgrade it. Is there any way to inspect or dump the sfq hash

I am looking for a simple way to guarantee to each flow going through my traffic control point 1/numflows of bandwidth. I thought using SFQ would do this effectively but it appears to be quite unfair: a very high speed download that fills the pipe easily starves smaller flows to the point where it becomes unusable (especially if they are at all interactive) Because numflows is dynamic,

I have a block of IP addresses (2048) used for ADSL connections to customers. In order to provide a fair slice of available bandwidth on the contended services I would like to be able to set up some kind of SFQ filter, but using a hash of the destination IP address rather than the the full source and destination ip and port. This would be done at the Internet side gateway for traffic being

About the cbq.init. Four machines which traffic to limit in same LAN. Is the samething if I put limiting rules to four different files or all to the same file? Like: DEVICE=eth0,10Mbit,1Mbit RATE=64Kbit WEIGHT=6Kbit PRIO=5 RULE=192.168.0.5 RULE=192.168.0.6 RULE=192.168.0.7 RULE=192.168.0.8 OR four equal files with different IPs, Ids and no PARENT rule? What style of ID numbering you use if

Hello guys I have a subnet with 255 users, which need to share 1 single slow internet connection, so i would like to implement a kind of *fair queuing *on the UPLOAD between them, which means that they all share the connection equally.. The tools that i have available is: A linux box with IPROUTE2,HTB and TC.. I have looked at some examples, and my first idea was to make 255 entries in

Hi. On Mar 12, Corey Hickey posted here(http://mailman.ds9a.nl/pipermail/lartc/2004q1/012038.html) an updated esfq patch for kernel 2.6. Has anyone backported it to kernel 2.4 ? Original esfq patch is not being kept in sync with kernel sfq, it seems. What people have been using with esfq and kernel 2.4.25, the original 2002 esfq patch ? Rubens

Hello! I''ve read a lot of mail archives, but can''t find solutions for my problem. I have router with about 700 users. I''m using HTB with SFQ leaf qdiscs for every user (client ip). So, different IP can have its own rate limit. This scheme ir working fine for a long time. But how can I limit number of connections (sessions) from one host? I see from ip_conntrack

Correct me if I''m wrong, I just want to help my friend who needs a tc solution with fairness to hosts on a 512K/s DSL line, but few of them should be restricted to 64K/s I thought about htb + esfq (sfq with ip based fairness, not connection) parent class with CEIL=500Kbit (no RULE? see *1) and attached esfq to this parent class, now child class with CEIL=64Kbit and RULE=10.0.0.1

Hi! Some time ago I faced a problem in limiting traffic on host with multiple uplinks. Since all the stuff worked nice seemed that there will be no problems. But then I realized that P2P users are smart enough to bypass limits as sfq doesn''t give fair sharing in this case (thousands of connections from one user versus few from the other). I tried IMQ but it''s instability in my

Hello again, Is it possible to split a bandwidth equally among clients regardless of its current link speed? I have a link that can get bursty at times. At any given time the N active sessions (the ones with non-empty queues) need to be serviced simultaneously, each at a rate of 1/N''th of the link speed. My case is an internet connection that oscillates between 96 kbps and 256 kbps. I

Hi If I have a HTB class with 128kbit, and I want to put "N" users in that class ( in order to share bandwidth fairly ) , which is better for me ? esfq (hash dst) or wrr ? I would attach esfq or wrr to HTB parent class. Also I''ve readed on Jim script that over WRR put a RED qdisc, but I don''t understand it. bests andres

please, help, i have build vpn server (suse 9 + poptop), i have managed to implement tc htb in ip-up script, but every client has own ppp interface (ppp0, ppp1, ppp2...), and my idea is to share available bandwidth, not to limit connection, how to build root tc rule, when I have more then one interface?... please any one width experiance regards _______________________________________________

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

Hey list I have almost gotten my shaping setup up and running as planned. The last barrier seems to be tcp overshooting availible bandwidth when its starting a transfer, and thereby bursting the line, so ping rises for a moment. At least this is my best guess at the problem :) There is a possibility that its just plain old traffic being bursty for some reason.. I am using bittorrent to test this,

Hi, A thought for the list. As I mentioned in another posting, there are a lot of QoS mechanisms out there. Linux supports some, but not all. Some patchsets add others, but don''t work for all kernels. There are also userland implementations, usually sitting in software routers, but there are other packages. Would it be helpful if I worked on a table of what''s out there for