similar to: Help with a simple config

Help! I can''t get TCNG to compile!!! It did this on 2 different machines! Here are the errors: -------------------------------------------- Kernel: 2.4.22 [root@localhost tcng]# uname -a Linux localhost.localdomain 2.4.22-1.2149.nptl #1 Wed Jan 7 13:08:26 EST #if KFULLVERSIONNUM >= 0x20416 /* gratuitous interface change in 2.4.22 :-( */ ERROR: ake -f Makefile.unclean tcsim make[2]:

Hi everyone, This is on a linux box, ingress (eth1) at 100Mb/s and egress (eth0) at 10Mb/s. The purpose is to test CBQ Here is my script ------------------------------------------------------------------- # Root qdisc tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1:0 cbq bandwidth 9Mbit \ avpkt 1000 cell 8 # Classes tc class add dev eth0 parent 1:0 classid 1:1 cbq bandwidth 9Mbit \ rate 5Mbit weight

I tried installing the WonderShaper on my internal link, mostly to get the SFQ installed. I set uplink and downlink to 100000 to match the link speed and changed the bandwidth on the cbq line to 100mbit. This killed transfer speed *to* the box, knocking it from 30-40 Mbps down to about 800 kbps. Commenting out just the ingress control restored the speed. What about the ingress policer would do

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

Hi, I find this diagram which details the kernel packet traveling : http://www.docum.org/docum.org/kptd/ Is it up to date ? I made some test and I put a DNAT rules in the PREROUTING table of an interface and I attach it a ingress policy, the dst IP wasn''t changed. the DNAT it isn''t yet make. I''ve another question (I''m not sure is it the good mailing list), for

Hi there good people, I''m a newbie in what concerns running Linux on machines other than desktops, so I need help from all you gurus out there :-) I have Linux installed on an old computer (Winchip C6, Pentium clone), acting as a router/firewall for two other computers. Both these machines are connected to the firewall via a dedicated ethernet card each, on different subnets,

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

Hi, I notice that if two or more existing connections match an ingress policing filter, the input bandwidth does not get evenly divided up between the n connections. Kinda like litters of baby animals, where the stronger babies get more access to the mothers teats and grow up bigger and faster than their siblings. The only workaround that''s working for me is to set explicit ingress

Hi, I am trying to do some simple ingress limiting based on fwmark. I know the ability and sense to do INGRESS limiting is ehm... limited ;-) but still I want to try it. I tried several things. === 1 === tcq ingress handle ffff: tcf parent ffff: protocol ip prio 1 handle 1 fw police rate 12mbit burst 10k drop tcf parent ffff: protocol ip prio 1 handle 2 fw police rate 10mbit burst 10k drop

Hi, Has anyone used TC in a wireless environment, which is dynamic. I understand that the parameters for queuing are static and cannot be changed unless the queuing discipline is deleted and reloaded with different parameters. If anyone can share any experience, that would be helpful. Thanx. Azim. _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl

Hi all. Since I move on to 2.6 kernel , filter ingress policy based on nfmark won´t work. Sorry for my english. Simple example: iptables -t mangle -I PREROUTING -j MARK --set-mark 1 ${QDISC_ADD} handle ffff: ingress ${FILTER_ADD} parent ffff: protocol ip prio 100 handle 1 fw \ police rate 128Kbit burst 10k drop flowid 2:11 # tc -s -d qdisc ls dev eth0 qdisc ingress ffff: ----------------

Hi everyone. I''m working on a problem since some days. I have a linux router with about 100 ppp interfaces. Each interface should bei limited to an individual bandwidth of 1024kbit, 2048kbit or 3096kbit. Up AND downstream. (let''s say for example 1024kbit upstream and 1024kbit downstream) The reason for this problem: I have to limit users to their booked bandwidth, because

Hi! I''ll try to set the incoming rate for one ip on a server (with more than one ip) to 17Mbit, but if I activate it, I got in the beginning only 5mbit. I than increased the mtu and burst (as you see below) but I still can''t get more than 8MBit to the server. any ideas? tc qdisc add dev eth0 handle ffff: ingress tc filter add dev eth0 parent ffff: protocol ip prio 50 u32

Hello! I have an internet connection of 64kbps garanteed in a channel of 256kbps. On this connection the metropolitan speed is 10Mbps and in the provider''s network the speed is 100Mbps. I have a few clients behind my linux box and i want to set up some limitations because some of them are using it irrational. I am marking the packets with 0 for internet; 1 for metropolitan 2 for

Hi all I started playing with tcng to generate my tc rules, but I have some difficulty implementing my rules... The script below generates an error: # Device eth0 tc qdisc add dev eth0 ingress beginner.tc:2: don''t know how to build meter for this The script is below, I changed the real IP numbers for XXs and YYs, since it doesn''t really matter what they are. eth0 is the

tc class add dev $DEV parent 1: classid 1:1 htb rate ${UPLINK}kbit burst 6k tc qdisc add dev $DEV handle ffff: ingress tc filter add dev $DEV parent ffff: protocol ip prio 50 u32 match ip src \ 0.0.0.0/0 police rate ${DOWNLINK}kbit burst 10k drop flowid :1 why does the download is being sent to class 1 which is limited by uplink ? why the rate is being mentioned in filter and in class ?

I have two interfaces, eth0 and eth1 but i can''t discern the egress traffic than ingress traffic. I need to apply htb qdisc in both directions, and I read that I need the IMQ patch to do this, because in ingress qdisc i can''t apply htb qdisc...but where is the ingress qdisc? affect the traffic that goes from eth0 to eth1 or is for the traffic that goes from eth1 to eth0?

Hello, I am using the following iptables POSTROUTING rule to NAT some RFC 1918 addresses: iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.19.23 ! 192.168.0.0/255.255.0.0 -p tcp --dport 80 -j SNAT --to-source 10.32.4.2 (I am using SNAT instead of MASQUERADE for performance reasons). I have several addresses on the 192.168.0.0/16 subnet that I am SNAT''ing similarly. Problem is, ''tc

Hi, all I''ve got problems with tc qdisc ingress. I''m using vanillia kernel 2.6.14.4 patched with http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/routes-2.6.14-12.diff, and iproute2-2.6.14-051107. i am using ingress to limit incoming traffic : (DEV is eth1 / DOWNLINK is 7700) # attach ingress policer: tc qdisc add dev $DEV handle ffff: ingress # filter *everything* to it (0.0.0.0/0), drop everything

Hi, Thanks for the fast response, .)Okay I tried your suggestion for my port 8099 and nothing happened: The tcp ip information goes from a firewall to my port 8099 and this port is than routed to the original 8080, I do that because I don`t want to dirturb my port 8080. But it seams the ingress filter doesn`t work on it!! iptables -L -t nat Chain PREROUTING (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt