similar to: prio and pfifo_fast not working the same?

For some time now im trying to get to know what causes such configuration of QOS (kernel 2.4.25-2.4.28 + IMQ patch and ofcourse wrr): -- WRR_MAX_CLASSES=200 DEV_IN=imq0 ifconfig $DEV_IN down ifconfig $DEV_IN up tc qdisc add dev ${DEV_IN} handle 1:0 root htb default 10 tc class add dev ${DEV_IN} parent 1:0 classid 1:10 htb rate 1000kbit burst 1kbit prio 1 tc qdisc add dev ${DEV_IN} parent 1:10

Dear members, I am trying to share the bandwith for all users fairly. because some users heavily uses p2p programs and a few hosts consume most of bandwith. when we limit each flow it does not work as one client has many connection at same time. Firstly I tried to write a script that use the ipfm(which accounts traffic usage) logs as follow .extract ip addresses heavy bandwith users from

I have set up wrr successfully on my bridge/shaper machine. That much works fine. I originally used sfq in the inner classes. However, there was a problem with high-bandwidth connections (web downloads, bittorrent) starving low-bandwidth low-latency connections like ssh. I would like to use prio or similar to prioritize the interactive traffic, but it does not seem to work. I have tested with

hi list, i''m about to setup traffic shaping on a server and got some small questions about the setup. i read alot of docs/howto''s but there are still some questions i''d like to ask. setup on the box is: - external if is ppp0 (dsl) - internal if in eth0 (with ~15 nat''ed boxes) - openvpn at tun1 since all ppl on the lan feel like they have to use p2p i decided

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 was updated kernel from 2.4.22 to 2.4.23 and now tc tools can''t correctly determine default (pfifo_fast) qdisc on interface: # tc/tc qdisc ls dev ppp0 qdisc pfifo_fast 0: [Unknown qdisc, optlen=20] but, if I assign f.e. cbq qdisc for some device all show correctly: # tc/tc qdisc ls dev ppp1 qdisc tbf 8009: rate 32Kbit burst 10Kb lat 1.5s qdisc cbq 66: rate 10Mbit

Hi all, I am testing one QOS system, I want to control bandwidth by VLAN id. Here is my test network: Internet Gateway | | QOS control box ( Bridge box, Redhat 9, 2.4.28 kernel with ebtables-brnf-8_vs_2.4.28 patch) | | VLAN Switch | | PC PC In my QOS control box, it is a bridge box, I used Redhat 9, 2.4.28 kernel with ebtables-brnf-8_vs_2.4.28

Thank you Andy! I did''t find why I could''t use the fw match in ingress. Now it works. Now I ran into another problem: When I try to add a pfifo_fast leaf qdisc dor htb classes it seg.-faults. Is pfifo_fast a special qdisc? I can succesfully add other type of qdiscs. I found that a similar problem was reported in february on a MIPS architecture. root@zefir:/usr/src# tc qdisc

Why am I getting giants on imq0? How do I stop that? ========== imq0 Link encap:UNSPEC HWaddr 00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00 UP RUNNING NOARP MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:39880312 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:39878715 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1024 RX

Hi, I have a cable modem with a bandwidth capped upload rate. I''d like to prioritize packets going outbound according to the TOS header of the IP field. I''ve read through the LARTC Howto several times, and I think I have a good feel for the information it it. It also seems that what I''m trying to do is pretty straight-forward and common. Unfortunately, the HOWTO

Hi all, Here''s the situation. I have 80 users sharing a internet link of 5Mb link. The users are grouped in /29 ip addr classes so I have 10 classes of users I want to create a root htb, then 10 htb childs each with 0.5Mb bandwidth. The traffic will be directed to each class using tc filters. Now, I want that each of 8 users from each class to share equally the class bandwidth. Can I

Hi all! I'm trying to make a transparent shaper with kernel 2.6.11 I have done this and used it many times on 2.4.25 kernel and ebtables-brnf-5_vs_2.4.25.diff On 2.4.25 I have been using U32 classifiers and HTB. On 2.6.11 even with : newserver ~ # zcat /proc/config.gz | grep -i BRIDGE_NETFILTER CONFIG_BRIDGE_NETFILTER=y newserver ~ # ls /proc/sys/net/bridge/ bridge-nf-call-arptables

I have this problem: I have an Internet line input with variable speed. I have a max speed and a min speed: Vmax and Vmin. The speed is always changing between Vmax and Vmin. I want to share the actual bandwidth (you don''t not how much, you only know the speed is between Vmax and Vmin) for N clients. The bandwidth should be shared so nobody can get more bandwidth than the others.

Hello, I read about the pfifo_fast has 3 bands, which allow you to prioritize traffic into these bands. I cannot find anything about these bands in the tc command reference (http://linux.bergqvist.se/tc/). I might be looking the wrong place - in which case, where should I look for help with this qdisc? The idea is to give "time-critical" sessions such as ssh, telnet etc. HIGHEST

Hi, A thought for the list. As I mentioned in another posting, there are a lot of QoS mechanisms out there. Linux supports some, but not all. Some patchsets add others, but don''t work for all kernels. There are also userland implementations, usually sitting in software routers, but there are other packages. Would it be helpful if I worked on a table of what''s out there for

Hello, I use HTB on IMQ, and I would like to use pfifo_fast on my HTB leafs. Do I need to add a pfifo_fast qdisc to my HTB class, or this is the default one? I tryed to add and I got: RTNETLINK answers: Invalid argument It looks like pfifo_fast qdisc is not supported on HTB leaf... Any comments? Regards, Thomas _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list /

First off, please excuse the cross post between lartc and netfiler, the line between the two is very blurred here (at least for me)... A thought just crossed my mind now while working on a new iptables/tc collaboration for a project. I use iptables to basically seal off a linux gateway, we''re very restrictive on what users can do on the connection. For now I''m using destination

Hi, At http://sourceforge.net/projects/ebtables/ you can find the following new releases: ebtables-brnf-3-vs-2.4.22 Changes: - let iptables see VLAN tagged IP traffic - bugfix for queued packets that get mangled in userspace - ebt_among module (Grzegorz Borowiak) - ebt_limit module (Tom Marshall) The patch compiles but I've done no further tests, but I probably didn't screw up.

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