similar to: HTB - prio and rate

Hi all, I''ve done a search through the archives but I can''t find a cause/solution to this. I''m running a FC4 box with the stock 2.6.12 kernel and a FC2 box with a stock 2.6.9 kernel. I''m obviously using iproute2 and the patched tc. When I clear down the qdiscs with "tc qdisc del dev <DEV> root" I get the following in response to "tc

I thought I had this all worked out, but it seems not. The following tc configuration: tc qdisc del dev ppp0 root 2> /dev/null > /dev/null tc qdisc add dev ppp0 root handle 1: tbf rate 120kbit burst 1200 limit 1 tc qdisc add dev ppp0 parent 1:1 handle 2: prio bands 3 tc qdisc add dev ppp0 parent 2:1 handle 10: sfq perturb 20 tc qdisc add dev ppp0 parent 2:2 handle 20: sfq perturb 20 tc

Hi all, Can you tell me where is the documentation for the new IFB (implemented in kernels > 2.6.16). Thanks in advance! Nikolay

Hello, First of all, I already contacted Martin Devera, the developer of HTB, and he told me to search for help on this mailinglist, thus I am describing my problems here now... I am kind of seriously annoyed by QoS as I have been trying for over 3 years to get it working properly - first I did not understand how it works, then it seemed not to work, then it was working perfectly for half a

With the below script, whenever I ping 10.0.16.10 (which matches the only filter I have), traffic still get''s sent to the default 1:2 class instead of 1:1 and I don''t know why... Any hints? (kernel 2.6.12, iproute2-2.6.15) tc qdisc del dev eth0 root > /dev/null 2>&1 tc qdisc add dev eth0 handle 1: root htb default 2 tc class add dev eth0 classid 1:1 parent 1: htb rate

Hello mailing list, i stand bevor a mystery and cannot explain it J. I want to do shaping and prioritization and I have done these following configurations and simulations. I can´t explain, that the combination of PRIO and TBF is much better than the HTB (with the prio parameter) alone or in combination with the SFQ. Here are my example configurations: 2 Traffic Classes http (80 = 0x50) and

Hello all, I am trying to make a filter into my QoS rules and I founded that when I try to use filters u32 and with fwmark they do not work together. This is the filter I use, just and example, for u32: $TC filter add dev $DL parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 u32 match ip sport 22 0xffff flowid 1:10 This is working fine. Now if I try to mark a package that I want it to go to the same

Hi guys, i have a little doubt ; I have eth0 ethernet and eth1 wireless , and they are bridged in br0 Is there any difference in the behavior between do tc qdisc add dev br0 root sfq OR tc qdisc add dev eth0 root sfq && tc qdisc add dev eth1 root sfq -- []''s Salatiel "O maior prazer do inteligente é bancar o idiota diante de um idiota que banca o

Hi, I''ve failed miserably in my endeavours so far and I''m at the point where help would be much appreciated. I want to have 3 bandwidth limited classes on my Internet interface. In each of those classes I want 3 prioritization bands, and then use "tc filters" to place the traffic into the correct class and priority. The problem is that the traffic

Hi to all of you!!! I am a Computer Science student trying to do the pre-grade thesis. I am trying to develop a free software tool to help administrators to control the traffic. Right now this tool is based on tc and iptables. I am having some problems trying to understand tc and tc examples: - Why in almost every list of tc rules based on htb class, there is a "tc qdisc dev ... root ...

Hi list! I have a LAN server with Gentoo Linux. It''s a Pentium III at 1000 MHz with 256 MB SDRAM. I''ve implemented a QoS solution with HTB and SFQ. Here is the diagram: _______________________________________________________________________ 1:--+----1:1 - [ counter-strike & icmp ] rate=1Mbit; ceil=1Mbit; | prio 0; (u32 filter

EHLO tc gurus. New to traffic control. Unfortunately, the politicians here in Denmark have decided that a PC is the same as a television set - so anyone owning a PC and internet connection of over 255 kbit/s must pay DKR 2200/year = EUR 300 = USD 400 in television licence fees :-( This is a lot of money for poor students, so we want to offer the students the *option* of limiting their

Hi folks. For quite a while, I tried to use linux (cbq and htb) to control bandwidth in order to replace a cisco equipment used to play this role on our network. After trying here and there, with a bunch of different distros, different versions, different compilations, ... the closest I could get was as follows: (using htb.init and cbq.init) Desired BW ==> Achieved BW 128k ==> 404.78

Hi all, this is really not really very easy to understand, or, to get in. Well, I''ve the following configuration on the router box: LAN - interface: eth0 - network: 192.168.2.5/24 - bandwidth: 100Mbit/s INET interface - interface: ppp0 - network: .dynamic.ip./0 - bandwidth: DOWN=1536kbit/s and UP=256kbit/s the LAN interface is to serve 6 other clients with internet and

I run a small Linux webserver and NAT router from my cable modem at home. Whenever someone starts an http download, all other traffic from my LAN is starved. Bandwidth is not really an issue, but latency is particularly horrible -- pings that usually come back in 20ms can take up to 600ms while the web server is active! I set up QoS (netfilter+iproute2) on the NAT machine in an attempt to give

Hi, I have a typical configuration for my firewall/gateway box: single network card, with a pppoe connection to the DSL modem. I''m already successfully shaping the uplink (how come that the wondershaper.htb doesn''t use the ceil parameter? It should implement bandwidth borrowing!) but i found the ingress policy a little bit rough. I''d like to keep the traffic categories

Hi, I wanted to implement some QOS on my Linux Box with HTB, but after some time spend on the configuration and tests, I still don''t manage to have some correct results. Here are the details : -ROOT 2000 kbits -HIGHPRIO SUBCLASS 50 kbits prio 0 -SUBCLASS1 750 kbits prio 1 -SERVICE1 250 kbits prio 1

Hello to everybody, We want integrate in a router/firewall (Debian Based, 2.6 Kernel), an HTB shaper. The goal is to divide the traffic for classes of workstations, at example in three classes, let say A, B and C. Example: A 70 Mb/s B 20 Mb/s C 10 Mb/s If B don''t make traffic, 7/8 of 20Mb/s must be assigned to A and all the rest at B We have used CBQ and HTB, with poor succes. Anybody

Hi everybody, i am new to this list so dont blame me if i will talk about nothing.. At this moment i am experimenting with htb + tc u32 filters , the problem is that i want some traffic to be unshaped so i did this.. tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 10: htb default 20 tc class add dev eth0 parent 10: classid 10:2 htb rate 256Kbit THIS IS TRAFFIC I WANT NOT TO BE SHAPED tc filter add dev eth0

Hey all. I''m trying to set up QoS using the HTB qdisc in a very basic setup, but it the example shown in the howto doesn''t seem to be working. While the packets show up in the correct classes, they appear to be completely ignoring the rates, meaning nothing gets shaped. My setup is that I''ve got a a bunch of machines behind my firewall/router: 1.2.3.1