similar to: Info about IFB

Hi! I would like to thank very much for this great page with Kernel Packet Traveling Diagram and to suggest small update concerning IMQ. I think the sentence: "IMQ in input comes before nat so IMQ does not know the real ip address. Ingress comes after nat, so ingress knows the real ip address." could be more precise like that: "By default IMQ in PREROUTING comes before nat and

Hi guys, I download and install the last iproute2 package. I done: 1) ./configure 2) make 3) make install When I do ip -V, it return: ip utility, iproute2-ss020116 ¿Is IPROUTE2 correctly installed on my system? Thanks -- Samuel Díaz García Director Gerente ArcosCom Wireless, S.L.L. mailto:samueldg@arcoscom.com http://www.arcoscom.com Móvil: 651 93 72 48 Tlfn.: 956 70 13 15

Is IFB realy replacement of IMQ Please Guide -- Failure seldom stops you. What stops you is the fear of failure. _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc

Hi, I''m trying to activate IFB device support in a 2.6.17 kernel from Debian Sid. I read that IFB device is the replacement for IMQ device, but I haven''t found any useful documentantion on how to activate this feature and the kernel documentation lacks of this information. I remember that IMQ could be activated in the ''Network devices'' menu in 2.6.8 kernels,

How to use IFB as replacement of IMQ There is not much documentation about it Please explain with example -- Failure seldom stops you. What stops you is the fear of failure. _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc

Hello! My goal is to setup an ingress traffic shaping on my PPPOE DSL line with ifb. My old imq stuff used iptables marks (like ''iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -p tcp --sport 22 -m length --length :500 -j MARK --set-mark 31'') to classify the traffic and since i am lazy, i tried to to reuse them with ifb. But no luck: iptables marks the packets well, but tc

Hello Tom, Sorry, please but i again return to IFB question. If i correct understand in current situation IFB haven't profit from ESFQ in common cases (i mean internal networks masquarading) so as we wait from ESFQ allocates bandwidth fairly per source IP(internal) but IFB don't know internal IPs. If i correct, what do you think what can help IFB to solve its main disadvantage

Hi all. I''m using Jamal''s ifb virtual interface from new kernel. Redirecting incoming traffic from external interface like that: # tc [blahbla] match u32 0 0 flowid 1:0 action mirred egress redirect dev ifb0 to ifb to shape it. The problem is that I''m using MASQUERADE by netfilter also. That redirected traffic coming from internet gets to ifb _before_ DNAT is done.

After varying degrees of success with p2p detection modules, I would like to write the following rules using iptables to reliably identify p2p traffic: 1. If a host on the network has 5 or more simutaneous tcp connections to ports above 1024, mark all connections to ports 1024 and above as 60. 2. If a host has received (or sent) UDP packets from 5 different hosts'' ports above 1024 in a

Hello I''m trying to switch from IMQ to IFB but I have a problem with traffic marked by ipp2p module. Looks like when traffic is redirected from ethX to ifbX it looses information about MARK. Here''s what I do to get ingress traffic to go to ifb interface: $TC qdisc add dev eth1.42 ingress $TC filter add dev eth1.42 parent ffff: protocol ip prio 10 u32 \ match u32 0 0

Server : eth0 - internet DSL eth1 - LAN wlan0 - wireles LAN I want server to share bandwith from eth0 evenly for users on eth1 and wlan0. How can i make it ? Is it possible ? As far as i know htb splits outgoing bandwith on one device only. ---------------------------------------------------- Grypa? Damy radę! Sprawdź jak jej zapowbiegać, a jeśli już za późno ...jak leczyć - grypa.wp.pl

Hey folks, I stumbled across the Mastershaper project ( http://www.mastershaper.org/ ) but I have a little problem: I wanted to shape the traffic coming from the router itself aswell as coming from the LAN behind the router, for that task I need IMQ, but with IMQ iptables-(layer7)-matching is not possible. Now I''ve talked with the programmer and he said the following: >The problem is

Hello Tom! After i read and analyze some docs about IFB i decide that for implement this feature in Shorewall not need more efforts (of course i may be wrong). If we have 'ifb0' device then we must activate ingress discipline on real device (f.e. eth2) and redirect 'egress' from it to 'ifb0'. tc qdisc add dev eth2 ingress tc filter add dev eth2 parent ffff: protocol ip

I''m experiencing a problem with masquerade downloads saturating my internet connection. I''ve implemented an IFB and now am looking into flow keys. Although I''ve read the documentation, I''m not sure I have this right. Can someone help? /etc/shorewall/params: MID_IF=eth0 MID_IF_TC=1 INET1_IF=eth1 INET1_IF_TC=2 INET1_IFB_IF=ifb0 INET1_IFB_TC=3 Note: MID_IF

Hello, It seems on RHEL/CentOS 5.2 iproute package is version 2.6.18, which apparently do not support IFB properly. The end result is that while no error is given, counters on ifb0 do not update, and capturing on the interface turns out nothing. Simply replacing tc with one from 2.6.26 solves this issue, it seems... Best regards -- Haim Gelfenbeyn Hagel Technologies Ltd.

On 2/19/07, Salatiel Filho <salatiel.filho@gmail.com> wrote: > Well , thanks to imq all my client machines are now shaped and > everything is great ... > But now i have a doubt , is there a way to shape the traffic that goes > to the route [doing a wget from the router for example ]? > > > I have a PREROUTING IMQ0 and a POSTROUTING IMQ1 , everything is > working like

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

Hello What I''m looking for is how to configure the Linux QoS module to do global rate limitation for two (or more) 802.1q pseudo network devices. I naturally suppose there is a possibility with IFB. I don''t want to use IMQ because it''s not integrated to my kernel v2.6.21.1 and I didn''t find IMQ patches for it nor for the iptables package I use (v1.3.7).

Hi everybody. I would like to know how incoming ipsec packets (from eth0 for example) interact with ifb device. For example: I want to redirect all incoming packets from eth0 to ifb0 for shaping. What happens to esp and the relative clear packets? By default both are seeing on the incoming device.

hello, i have eth0 (Internet) + eth1,eth2 (local), how to i use IFB in real for shaping Download, how to i redirect traffic from eth0 to ifb0 with "mark". I testing marking with iptables but any mark not working - always use "default" mark... thanks _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl