similar to: packet marking: only a ratio, not all

Hi! I am learning tcng without having experiance of tc and I am trying to build something that shall schedule traffic dependent on the value in the IPv4 packets ip_ttl field. I have read the tcng reference manual and cannot find information about forwarding. Is it possible to farward packets from ingress to egress without sending them upwards in layers?

I can use DSMARK to mark on the Egress side. Is there a way to mark/change the DSCP value of an incoming packet on the ingress side? Thanks. Jon Flechsenhaar Boeing WNW Team Network Services (714)-762-1231 202-E7

Hi all, Another requirement we have is that traffic entering the DS domain be classified then subsequently assigned a (different?) DSCP based upon its classification. For illustrative purposes only let''s say (for traffic entering the DS domain on dev eth0): - WWW traffic would be marked BE - traffic destined for 10.10.10.10 would be marked AF11 - VoIP traffic from 20.20.20.20 would

Hello all, Please could someone help me with this, I have been trying for days to get this to work. I would like to have BE, AF & EF classes with HTB qdisc. I can''t find any scripts online where this has been done. If I enable this filter: #tc filter add dev eth0 parent 2:0 protocol ip prio 1 \ #tcindex mask 0xf0 shift 4 pass_on then BE & AF classification seems to be fine but

Hi, I am trying to implement a simple scaled-down version of the AF traffic class type. As such I basically want to remark non-conforming AF11 packets to AF13. Here is m script that I have been using on the ingress router of my network: ---------------------------------------- Link=''dev eth1'' Rate1=''rate 800Kbit'' Rate2=''rate 2500Kbit''

Hi all! Anyone got the same problem? If I: tc qdisc add dev eth0 handle 1:0 root dsmark indices 4 set_tc_index it works fine. If I: tc qdisc add dev eth0 handle 1:0 root dsmark indices 4 it says: RTNETLINK answers: Invalid argument I just don''t need that set_tc_index stuff for marking. Ferenc __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam?

Guys Considering the festive season is upon us, thanks to everyone contributing to the list and helping all the readers with your great input! I don''t want to mention names, I''ll most certainly leave someone out. With this mail I''d like to test some theory on bandwidth management, with my own successes and failures during the past year. Sharing a link between 200

Hello all, I am trying to set up a simple htb based system, where packets with source ip 10.0.0.1 should have their own class. I plan to use tcng to set it up easier. Is there something wrong in my tcng file ? ~/tcng$ cat htb /* */ #include "fields.tc" #include "ports.tc" dev eth0 { htb ( ) { class ( rate 600kbps, ceil 600kbps ) {

Hello, I have the following proplem. My DiffServ configuration is working fine when I do ping, but when I use mgen the packets are not detected at the core router. Here is my core router configuration: #!/bin/bash tc qdisc add dev eth1 handle 1:0 root dsmark indices 64 set_tc_index tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 tcindex mask 0xfc shift 2 tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent

Hi, I have typical situation, local LAN with private addresses, translated via NAT to internet. I need to shape ingress traffic (from internet to local LAN) in several HTB queues accorting to destination (private not public) IP. So I need mark packets to divide them to corresponding queue. According to http://www.docum.org/stef.coene/qos/kptd/ I thing I have only one way how to do it, because

I am successfully running ingress (IMQ) and egress (HTB) shaping on a bridge. Is there any way to combine and share the bandwidth between ingress and egress? Example: I have set up www service for egress at 128 KB and ingress at 256 KB. The shaping on them works fine separately. However, I want to create a single virtual pipe for www traffic and limit both ingress and egress combined to 256 KB.

Hello, I run one of my PCs as my personal router, with iptables+tc to control traffic and be my firewall. In TC, I use a combination of htb, qdisc and sfq (as well as prio) to classify bandwidth. In my current setup, I have 10 classifications of my bandwidth. (Even I admit this is probably more than I need, but at this point I''m still learning, so I''ll just leave them be.)

I have two interfaces, eth0 and eth1 but i can''t discern the egress traffic than ingress traffic. I need to apply htb qdisc in both directions, and I read that I need the IMQ patch to do this, because in ingress qdisc i can''t apply htb qdisc...but where is the ingress qdisc? affect the traffic that goes from eth0 to eth1 or is for the traffic that goes from eth1 to eth0?

Hi, I have a Debian that is connected to Internet in eth0, and to a LAN in eth1. I wanted to control traffic with HTB, dividing it depending on what kind of traffic is (Mail, Application Server and others). Would it be good to use HTB qdisc in eth0 egress to control outgoing traffic and HTB qdisc in eth1 egress to control incoming traffic? Or the only way to control incoming traffic is with eth0

[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 all I''m new to this list, but not exactly to iproute stuff. I''d like to solve a specific problem with bandwidth coming from different external sources towards the internal network (also the other way around, but I figure that''s not so much a problem, since that is egress traffic shaping). The network looks like this: internet ------ ISP-------[shaping/router]

I''ve followed this list for quite a long time and have even posted a couple of times. I used the early versions of IMQ from Devik (I think that was his name), and it worked well. I only ever got the chance to implement it in my test environment. I now need to implement it in my production environment. My Linux core router has nine interfaces and has a 27 megabit connection to the

ingress can be used to control the incoming packet, such as: tc qdisc add dev eth0 handle ffff: ingress tc filter add dev eth0 parent ffff: protocol ip prio 5 u32 match ip src 172.16.1.11 police rate 10kbit burst 10k drop flowid :1 tc filter add dev eth0 parent ffff: protocol ip prio 5 u32 match ip src 172.16.1.22 police rate 10kbit burst 10k drop flowid :2 first ,I do not sure these method can

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

Hi all, ive been reading lartc howto, im new about traffic shaping/police. As far as red (chapter 9 complete) i saw that first the packet passes at the ingress qdisc, then it passes to the ip stack if the packet is directed to the box or its forwarded (is my case), then it falls to the egress classifier/s. Now, i understand if i have an ipsec vpn at the outside interface, the egress