similar to: HTB + ESFQ in nat router for shape incoming by ip

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 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

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

Hello, First I want to point out that I''m not so familiar with HFSC, since there not so much info online. But here is my script: ${TC} class add dev ${LAN_IFACE} parent 1:0 classid 1:1 hfsc ls rate 100mbit ul rate 100mbit ${TC} class add dev ${LAN_IFACE} parent 1:1 classid 1:2 hfsc ls rate 90mbit ul rate 90mbit ${TC} class add

Hi, I have a default class for my un-marked traffic (prio 5) and a prio 0 class for the important stuff, but I do not understand why my download traffic is duplicated in both. It work fine for my upload traffic (same setting except the red class but I have the same result if I create an esfq instead). Any comments/information will be appreciated. Below my config : tc commands from my scirpt :

Dear list: I have a problem I cannot handle yet, and need to solve it as soon as possible. Would be very greatful with anybody who can help me. I have a 512/512 link to internet, that I want to share between several computers. I have eth0, with a public IP address, conected to Internet, and also, eth1, with a private IP address, for network with the surfing computers. I have a main class with

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

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

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

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! 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

Actually i gave up, i tried and tried and tried so many times, upgrading software falling back to an old version but it didn''t work, that''s it. i can''t do work together tc with iptables and iproute2 when i mark a packet with iptables tc doesn''t recognize them so it falls at the default leaf of the tc''s tree what i like is to mark packets depending on

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

please, help, i have build vpn server (suse 9 + poptop), i have managed to implement tc htb in ip-up script, but every client has own ppp interface (ppp0, ppp1, ppp2...), and my idea is to share available bandwidth, not to limit connection, how to build root tc rule, when I have more then one interface?... please any one width experiance regards _______________________________________________

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

now, i''m learning and try to read a lot of article about tc command in linux for setting traffic shaper. but i''m doubt about In the theory about tc command ... In general, we define class under root qdisc but Is it can be possible ???? If we define another qdisc under root qdisc, Can i do it? because i have just read tc command syntax and i found this point ... syntax: tc qdisc