similar to: Questions about PRIO & SFQ

Hi, I''m work on traffic shaping and I would like to know if it''s possible to mix differents Queueing Disciplines ?? I would like to combine the proporties of a PRIO discipline with that of a CBQ discipline. I read some documentation and I found nothing about that, can you help me ? I think to try something like that : tc qdisc add dev $DEV root handle 1: cbq … tc class add dev

Hi all. I have a bridge running Linux 2.4.24 that I use as a bandwidth manager on a broadband wireless network. I''m using HTB and SFQ to prioritize that share bandwidth on a per-cell basis. My IP tables rules divide the traffic based on IPand traffic type (using layer-7 filter and ipp2p). My goal is to make sure that p2p traffic on the network doesn''t sink all of the

http://ds9a.nl/lartc/manpages I finished some more manpages, and improved others. New are tc-tbf.8, tc-sfq.8, tc-prio.8 and tc-red.8. Please check & use them. http://ds9a.nl/lartc/manpages -- http://www.PowerDNS.com Versatile DNS Software & Services Trilab The Technology People Netherlabs BV / Rent-a-Nerd.nl -

I thought I had this all worked out, but it seems not. The following tc configuration: tc qdisc del dev ppp0 root 2> /dev/null > /dev/null tc qdisc add dev ppp0 root handle 1: tbf rate 120kbit burst 1200 limit 1 tc qdisc add dev ppp0 parent 1:1 handle 2: prio bands 3 tc qdisc add dev ppp0 parent 2:1 handle 10: sfq perturb 20 tc qdisc add dev ppp0 parent 2:2 handle 20: sfq perturb 20 tc

Hi, I have implemented qos at my gateway, mostly for speeding up dns and [video,voice] chat traffic and to slow down p2p traffic. It seems every thing is working properly, as by browsing speed has been improved. But I want to test it by sending various traffic and to see through which qdisc the traffic flows, so that i can be certain that it is working the way I want it to work. The rules

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

I have a machine running 2.4.25 w/ wrr, ebtables-brnf, iptables CLASSIFY and esfq patches (not using esfq, though). I have wrr set up, and within each class I want to prioritize ssh, web, etc..., but right now I am testing with pings. I have the following in my POSTROUTING mangle table: CLASSIFY icmp -- anywhere anywhere CLASSIFY set 0:6 I find that if I attach a prio

Hello. Sorry for my poor english =) I have following config for traffic prioritization: tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: prio tc qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:1 handle 10: tbf rate 7000kbit buffer 1600 latency 2msec tc qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:2 handle 20: sfq tc qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:3 handle 30: tbf rate 3000kbit buffer 1600 latency 50msec tc qdisc add dev eth1 root

Here goes the filter statements: #Initializing traffic control... tc qdisc add dev br0 root handle 1:0 htb #Loading queue disciplines for plis230 network... tc class add dev br0 parent 1:0 classid 1:1 htb rate 512kbit ceil 512kbit #Loading queue disciplines for pmad048 network... tc class add dev br0 parent 1:1 classid 1:20 htb rate 30kbit ceil 30kbit #server queue tc class add dev br0 parent

Hello...I have a Slackware based machine doing routing & QoS for my internal LAN users... It has two interfaces: eth1(100mbps) that connects to the aDSL modem(USR 9105) and eth0(100mbps) that connects to my local LAN... I''am using shorewall as a firewall...i think it''s configured well as it''s working as i want and i pass all the online firewall tests... :D All lan

Hello. I''m running linux box with Slackware 9.1 and compiled kernel 2.4.31 with "yes" to VLANs and "yes" to all QoS. On this box i have more ethernet interfaces: eth0 eth1 eth2 and so as more vlan interfaces: eth0.100 eth1.3 eth1.4 This is entrace(uplink) router to our whole network and my goal is to shape users on this machine. I want for this purpose use HTB so

Hi, i''m newbie with traffic control. I create a script based in one from Jason Boxman (thx a lot). the upload flow is prioritized well, but when i download from a site, the down flow vary a lot from 25 KB to 4 KB. Before i use this script the downloads are constant between 22 an 25 KB. Perhaps there''s something wrong in my script ? I paste it, thx.

Hi all ! I''m building a network appliance whose goals are to enhance Voip quality on 512/128k DSL links. But, i have a voice quality problem, and i think i''m doing something wrong, but i can''t find what. Please excuse my terrible english, i''m french. >From what i''ve read, tc is the tool i need. I read the documentations, readmes and lartc.org

Having a problem with classid and prio and position. Wondering if someone could help? Below I have pasted a part of my current rules, now it consists of one chain and two pipes. If they both use 60Kbit which one would get priority? Would it be the one with the better prio or the one with the lower classid or would it be the one which is first on the list? /sbin/tc class add dev eth1 parent

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

PROBLEM: My filtering rules don''t seem to be working in the latest incarnation of my shaping script. I''ve changed from using multiple HTB classes to just one and a PRIO qdisc, and now my filters don''t seem to have any effect. OVERVIEW: What I used to have is pretty much the same as the htb wondershaper script (with some tweaks), which worked fine, but I noticed that my

Hi, I have a router/firewall running Linux (like the most of you) and I wanted to do some traffic control. I''ve created an root PRIO qdisc like the example in paragraph 9.5.3.1 (http://www.lartc.org/howto/lartc.qdisc.classful.html#AEN903) with three SFQ child-classes. I wanted for interactive (ssh, telnet, ftp-control) and dns-traffic to be placed in the first queue, http should go in

Hello mailing list, i stand bevor a mystery and cannot explain it J. I want to do shaping and prioritization and I have done these following configurations and simulations. I can´t explain, that the combination of PRIO and TBF is much better than the HTB (with the prio parameter) alone or in combination with the SFQ. Here are my example configurations: 2 Traffic Classes http (80 = 0x50) and

Anyone notices that using sfq qdisc adds latency compared to pfifo? With "sfq perturb 10" ping latency is around 100-120ms, while with "pfifo limit 3" drops to ~10-30ms (qdiscs belong to htb class). I''m missing something or is this expected? { $TC_CLASS parent 1:1 classid 1:20 htb prio 0 rate 900kbit ceil 1000kbit burst 7k $TC_QDISC parent 1:20 handle 200: {pfifo

Please see below Jon Flechsenhaar Boeing WNW Team Network Services (714)-762-1231 202-E7 -----Original Message----- From: Flechsenhaar, Jon J Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 9:35 AM To: lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl Subject: [LARTC] 2.6.14 - HTB/SFQ QoS broken? Jody: I don''t know if you answer basic HTB questions but I''l try anyway. I''m implementing AF and EF with a