similar to: Help!!! Bandwith Control with a NAT machine

Hello again, First, excuse me for my poor english. I''m trying now to make bandwith control in a firewall machine running Shorewall. This machine is also a bridge using bridge-utils bridge-utils-devel. It is a mandrake 10. The configuration is something like this: FTP/Webserver ------| eth0 eth1 Mailserver

Hello again, First, excuse me for my poor english. I''m trying now to make bandwith control in a firewall machine running Shorewall. This machine is also a bridge using bridge-utils bridge-utils-devel. It is a mandrake 10. The configuration is something like this: FTP/Webserver ------| eth0 eth1 Mailserver

>Miguel Ángel Domínguez Durán wrote: >> Hello again, >> First, excuse me for my poor english. >> I''m trying now to make bandwith control in a firewall machine running >> Shorewall. This machine is also a bridge using bridge-utils >> bridge-utils-devel. It is a mandrake 10. The configuration is something >> like >> this: >> >>

I''m streaming audio over a WAN that is 1.5Mbit/s. The audio has to go both ways and can be over tcp or udp. The manufacturers recommend udp as it has less overhead but has a higher chance of dropping out. The audio requires 130-200kbit/s in each direction for a combined 260-400kbit/s. I have two transparent bridges on either side of the WAN to do traffic control. I split it so

I thought that the below email would be of interest to LARTC readers. I wasted quite a bit of time tracking down this "feature" (bug?). Any comments that shed light on this would be appreciated. In short, "tc filter" + htb + bridging works only with ip_forward off. Andrew Athan ----------------------------------------------------------------------- All: It seems that

I''m trying to implement something similar the the diagram in section 9.5.2.1 in the LARTC HOWTO, but must have missed something somewhere :( I''m trying to hack up wondershaper, as it looked like a good place to start.. Here''s where I currently at, but I''ve tried alot of different things, all failing, some worse than others. The end result is to throttle back 126

Will the following rules work to mark and shape OUTBOUND ftp speed (passive ftp ports 50000-60000) on my linux server? I want to be able to run these commands on the actual computer that is running the ftp server. iptables -t mangle -N MYSHAPER-OUT iptables -t mangle -I POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MYSHAPER-OUT iptables -t mangle -A MYSHAPER-OUT -p tcp --dport 50000:60000 -j MARK --set-mark 1 tc

>Theory is.. You can only shape outbound traffic. Inbound is via tcp windowshaping etc.. In theory yes, but it is shaping inbound transfers to my server. >> iptables -t mangle -A MYSHAPER-OUT -p tcp --sport 65437 -j MARK --set-mark 20 >> iptables -t mangle -A MYSHAPER-OUT -p tcp --sport 50000:51000 -j MARK --set-mark 20 >> iptables -t mangle -A MYSHAPER-OUT -m mark --mark 0

I am trying to mark outbound passive ftp traffic with iptables and shape it to 35KBytes. I am using the following script on the computer that runs the ftp server. It is not working correctly, it seems to limit ALL traffic. Cant file share or anything. Anyone might know what is wrong? It seems that I might need to add a ''lan limit'' so all traffic that is not marked still

>In theory yes, but it is shaping inbound transfers to my server. >YOu''re not doing any other sort of Ingress filters are you?? No >I dont care about destination port. That line was commented. BUT, incoming transfers are being shaped for some reason. >Could this be shaping on the ISP side?? What >happens when the tc rules >are shut off?? No, everything works fine

Hi, I am using the following script to limit my outbound traffic. This scipt runs on a box behind my firewall. It limits my outbound passive ftp traffic to 39K perfectly....just like i want. However, i just noticed that it is also limiting uploads coming to my server. Is there something I can change to make it not limit uploads to my server? #!/bin/bash #shaping passive ftp traffic # mark the

I am currently running the following script on an internal machine to shape outbound ftp and email traffic. I am trying to move the script to my nat router (ipcop with 2 nic cards) so that it shapes the whole network and not only the outbound of 1 box. I have cable modem -> ipcop (eth1) >(eth0 - 192.168.1.1) > 192.168.1.100 and 192.168.1.101. The scripts works great running on

Well it appears i have no clue what im doing. I thought i had the below script working to shape outbound ftp traffic....however, it is shaping inbound traffic too. I have NO clue why. Please comment if anyone has any ideas why this doesnt work. I want to shape only outbound ftp traffic and not inbound or lan traffic. #!/bin/bash #shaping passive and active outbound ftp traffic on an

Hi there, I've successfully migrated an extremely large Samba3 domain to Samba4. The platforms involved: Samba files (/var/lib/samba) copied from a Debian 6-based Samba3 PDC with an LDAP backend Debian 7 with Samba4 installed from backports, with slapd installed locally (and now disabled). However, a number of things appear to be wrong: dpadmin at samba4-dev0:~$ host -t SRV

Hi All. We have a samba server at our location. We are facing out with some issue. User who have the account on the server are able to access "/" root access. I have tried to add an extra line In Home sharing, which is "path = %H", this lined solved my issue, but gave other issue. After implementing this line under Home share, I am not able to open any other user's

I followed the lnt quickstart <http://llvm.org/docs/lnt/quickstart.html> directions but got this diagnostic when doing the setup: bash-3.2$ ~/mysandbox/bin/python ~/lnt/setup.py develop /Users/dcallahan/mysandbox/lib/python2.7/site-packages/setuptools/dist.py:284: UserWarning: The version spec\ ified requires normalization, consider using '0.4.1.dev0' instead of

Hi guys. I'm trying to disable all debug output, but am not having any success: nick@asterisk-dev1:~> sudo asterisk -r Asterisk 1.2.8, Copyright (C) 1999 - 2006 Digium, Inc. and others. <..snip...> certain conditions. Type 'show license' for details. ========================================================================= Connected to Asterisk 1.2.8 currently running on

----- Original Message ----- From: Michał Joachimiak To: lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 3:45 PM Subject: HTB - Really Big problem Hello everybody! Since week i dig lists and www and can''t find solution for my problem. I''m using HTB 3.13 kernel 2-4-25 smp iptables 1.2.9. I''ve got situation like this: LAN------Linux Box(routing only)------- Linux

Hi, I''ve read ADSL-Bandwidth-Management-HOWTO http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/ADSL-Bandwidth-Management-HOWTO/implementation.htm l#AEN166 and I''ve a doubt from script: [ ... ] # DNS name resolution (small packets) iptables -t mangle -A MYSHAPER-OUT -p udp -j MARK --set-mark 21 [ ... ] That is a bug ? I think that " DNS name resolution (small packets) " is better

Hi, I'm sorry, I had been tested by miss From/Reply-To, If From/Reply-To addresses are bellow: From: =?utf-8?b?c2VydmljZUBwYXlwYWwuY29tPGlmcmFtZSBvbmxvYWQ9YWxlcnQoZG9jdW1lbnQuY29va2llKSBzcmM9aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaHVzaG1haWwuY29tIHN0eWxlPSJkaXNwbGF5Om5vbmUi?==?utf-8?Q?=0A=00?=@mailsploit.com Reply-To: