similar to: QoS on a bridge+NAT

Greetings, I have been reading the list for a little while now, but this is the first occasion I have had to post--of course, because of a problem. My problems began when I upgraded my RedHat 9 system to 2.6.10 from source. Aside from some other booting issues and things, all of which appear to be resolved, the only things NOT working are my scripts for traffic control. I get a whole host of

I''ve been following the HOWTO, and reading mailing list discussions about throttling bandwidth, and have had some success, but I just want to tie off some loose ends. Essentially what I am wanting to do is to keep our bandwidth usage below 1megabit, because if we go over we get charged for that traffic. I''ve used some of the examples from the HOWTO to limit our bandwidth, but I

Hi, I have been modifying the Wonder shaper to include another queue. My understanding was packets would be de queued to hardware in the following order: cbq1 -> sfq10 > sfq20 > sfq30. Also we only move onto the next queue when the preceding one is empty. However is seems to be prio xx number that reflects the order packets are de queued not to what flowid they belong to. If I

hey guys i am regulating the traffic to & fro by my network through a linux gateway , its behaving strange. i regulated Downlink to 2Mbps & UPlLINK to 500Kbps. both perform well when those are done independent i.e. one at a time but when i do both from a client system ..the downlink however continues at 2mbps but the uplink falls down to 100kbps? is something wrong with my script or

Hi everybody, I have a network that only uses terminal services. Look at the diagram. 20 machines running WinXP <-> LinuxFW-1 <-> 1Mbit link dedicated fiber link <–> LinuxFW-2 <–> Terminal Server I’d like to give the maximum priority for bandwidth to terminal services (port 3389). I’ve changed the CBQ script from LARTC site to suite my needs, but every time I

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

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 ] >

Hi, I''m trying to modify the Wondershaper script so achieve the following. 1. Prioritize traffic to the few IP addresses. 2. Everyone else should get a fair amount of bandwidth The problem I am facing is when I run this script is that the bandwidth seems to get halved. I tried to apply this script to a site where the upstream and downstream were fully saturated. I immediately saw

Hi folks, I read the fantastic LARTC How-to and after that i tried to limit one host in my LAN for both down-and upload bandwidth usage. I took section 15.9. and added uplink-limiting as I understood it from the previous chapters. Unfortunately it doesn''t work. I ran the script and went to the specified PC, started a download, and watched the rate. The rate was always about 2000 kbit/s,

Greetings - I''m new to QoS, so please be gentle (and yes, I''ve RTFM, though I don''t understand every bit of it) Here''s the thing; I''ve tried several scripts--simple and complex--for classifying my Vonage traffic into a high-priority queue, but no matter what I do it doesn''t seem to work. Right now I''m using the HTB script

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 all, I''m having some problems setting up qdiscs on a bridge.The config looks a little like this: ifconfig ifb0 up # Bring up the IFB for this bridge. tc qdisc add dev eth2 ingress tc qdisc add dev eth3 ingress tc qdisc add dev ifb0 root handle 1:0 cbq bandwidth 100Mbit avpkt 1000 cell 8 # Raw qdiscs on each bridge port tc qdisc add dev eth2 root handle 1:0 cbq bandwidth

Hello all, I''ve got a couple redundant (Spanning Tree Protocol) boxes running FC1 minimal install + bridge-utils and they are working great for QoS + ntop monitoring. I''m wondering if I should handle the VoIP traffic a little differently. I don''t mind letting VoIP and Video lend out traffic when it isn''t being used, so that''s why I gave them such

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 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

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

Hi, I''m really new to traffic shaping and try to implement the wshaper.htb script. I have a linux box that serves as vdr, mldonkey, samba, apache and mailserver (imap), connected to my LAN with 100mbit. I''m connected to the inet via adsl with a hardware router/firewall, got 384k downlink 64k uplink. When I have mldonkey running, imap (via Outlook) gets *very* slow (mails with

Hi, I have a question conercing wondershaper. I''m using the Clarkconnect linux distribution for my linux router and I tried to use wondershaper. On start up of wshaper, there are no errors or any other problems but I''m not sure if it''s running correctly. Only one qdisc / one class is used and when I start an uplink ftp transfer, my ping time is growing up to 1700ms - I

Hi I''m looking for a quick recipe for a newbie to control http traffic in my linux gw. My internet is overloaded already and vpn external clients are experiencing troubles (disconnecting in peak hours). Any suggestions ? Regards Guillermo Caracas/Venezuela On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 14:40, lartc-request@mailman.ds9a.nl wrote: > Send LARTC mailing list submissions to >

Hi there, We''re running a small ISP and all the users are shaped to 384/512/768k both ways (whichever package they choose). The router is a linux (debian sarge), the kernel is 2.4.25 right now. All users are getting 10.1.1.* ip addresses (eth1) and eth0 connects to the isp using ethernet (via a media converter, it''s fiber from there). They''re nat''s using