similar to: [ANNOUNCE] ESFQ for Linux 2.6.13

Hello! I am using since yesterday ESFQ instead of N HTB queues. It mostly works OK, but when somebody is using one single sesion (for example downloading file via FTP), it gets weird speed. For example it is 20 kilobytes pres second, then drops down to 9, then 20 again, and then slowly to 0 and stops. But when using download accelererator of some kind or bittorrent client which uses many

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

ESFQ''s original hashing algorithm never worked particularly well for the src or dst hash types: close IP addresses, such as 10.0.0.1 and 10.0.0.2 often hashed to the same number, even with many different perturbation values. This prevented the src and dst hash types from working adequately with small and medium-sized network ranges. A while ago, I added the src_direct and dst_direct hash

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

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

Hello I am using htb (krenel 2.6.14.3 + esfq patch from fatooh.org) to limit the bandwidth. But I want the absolute maximum rate to be for example 5Mbit and not to exceed it. here is the script: $tc qdisc add dev ${NETIF} root handle 1 htb r2q 4 $tc class add dev ${NETIF} parent 1: classid 1:21 htb rate 5Mbit ceil 5Mbit $tc class add dev ${NETIF} parent 1:21 classid 1:101 htb rate 2Mbit ceil

Since I admin the gateway for a network of bandwidth-greedy machines, I figured that esfq with "hash src" would be a more fair allocation of bandwidth than sfq. Unfortunately, there didn''t seem to be a recent patch for 2.6, so I endeavored to build one. The three patches I made (described below) are available within the attached tar.bz2 or at: http://fatooh.org/esfq-2.6/ 1. I

Hi! I''m getting this error while I try to compile iproute2-2.6.11-050330: gcc -D_GNU_SOURCE -O2 -Wstrict-prototypes -Wall -I../include -DRESOLVE_HOSTNAMES -DCONFIG_GACT -DCONFIG_GACT_PROB -c -o q_esfq.o q_esfq.c q_esfq.c: In function `esfq_parse_opt'': q_esfq.c:45: error: structure has no member named `hash_kind'' q_esfq.c:45: error: `TCA_SFQ_HASH_CLASSIC''

Hello list. Yesterday i ask Corey Hickey (maintainer a patch for the original SFQ - http://fatooh.org/esfq-2.6/) about ESFQ perspectives and got your answer: > I do not intend to develop ESFQ any further, since I now maintain a > patch for the original SFQ. As for getting that merged into the kernel, > that will probably happen eventually, but I haven't had much time or >

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

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

Hi, It is exactly what I need except one thing. I don''t know exactly if my router is the right place to apply QoS policy. It has two network interfaces and both are 10Mbit/s. The slow part of the network is little bit more far. On their QoS we have 2Mbit and I want all our users to divide this bandwidth equally but also don''t want to unnecessarily restrain their bandwith and to

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

Hi I have a small lan (10.0.0.0/8) behind my linux box. I use MASQUERADE to allow users connects to internet. I set up an esfq qdisc for outgoing traffic. And there is a little question. Does source hash type in esfq recognize NATed local ip''s? -- Pozdrawiam Marcin mailto:slacklist@op.pl _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing

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

Hi, i´ve read about this problem but i didn´t find any solution. I have a router with nat like that: internet - eth0 - Router - eth1 - Lan I made a htb script for shaping outgoing in eth0 and it works great. The problem begin with the incoming traffic... Like other people said, when somebody in the lan uses the tipical download accelerator, the line is out because the bandwidth is divided by

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

In esfq README i have: Depth sets the number of slots. If the number of active flows is greater than the number of slots, flows will end up sharing slots and ESFQ will no longer be fair. If you anticipate more than 128 concurrently active flows, you should use a larger depth and probably a larger divisor (see below). If you expect there to be far fewer than 128 concurrent flows, you

FYI, i''ve just created a quick patch adding esfq (Enhanced Stochastic Fairness queueing discipline) for tcng (Traffic Control Next Generation). Patch is located at http://devel.dob.sk/tcng+esfq. Enjoy. Sam

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