similar to: ESFQ?

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

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! 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

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! 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

hi i tried the example given on the examples page to duplicate selected traffic like tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: prio tc qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:3 handle 3: netem duplicate 40% tc filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 3 u32 match ip dst 11.0.2.2 flowid 1:3 when i ping from 11.0.2.2 to this interface my machine hangs. the same thing works for drop or delay. i would

The HTB scheduler code is a mess, this patch set does some basic house cleaning. The first four should cause no code change, but the last two need more testing. -- Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org> "And in the Packet there writ down that doome" - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to

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 there, i am trying to shape a network for a college dorms... INTERNET---- ETH0--------Nat Box-------ETH1--------LAN I have set up classes of traffic (HTTP, FTP, MAIL, IM, OTHER) and i have assigned a rate for everyone with a HTB qdisc. The limit based in traffic is working flawlessly. However, under every HTB class i have set up a ESFQ queue discipline with hash value set to

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

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

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

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

In a recent thread on this list, Robert Kurjata provided me a patch to add hashing by iptables mark to the Linux 2.4 version of ESFQ. Thanks to that contribution, I was able to easily add support to the 2.6 port I maintain. I found out, however, that the existing hash algorithm results in a lot of colllisions when the range of hashed values is small. The purturbation spreads the collisions out a

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

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

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

I have a block of IP addresses (2048) used for ADSL connections to customers. In order to provide a fair slice of available bandwidth on the contended services I would like to be able to set up some kind of SFQ filter, but using a hash of the destination IP address rather than the the full source and destination ip and port. This would be done at the Internet side gateway for traffic being

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