[LARTC] Re: [PATCH] HTB O(1) class lookup

On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 06:14:13PM +0100, Simon Lodal wrote: ... > Regards ... It seems decisions makers need more time, so I'd add 2 cents more: 1c: an indentation could be improved (spaces around operators), like in these places: >+#define HTB_MAX_CLS (TC_H_MIN(-1)+1) ... >+ ht

[LARTC] Re: [PATCH] HTB O(1) class lookup

On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 06:14:13PM +0100, Simon Lodal wrote: > On Monday 05 February 2007 11:16, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > > On 01-02-2007 12:30, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > Simon Lodal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> Memory is generally not an issue, but CPU is,

[LARTC] Re: [PATCH] HTB O(1) class lookup

On 01-02-2007 12:30, Andi Kleen wrote: > Simon Lodal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Memory is generally not an issue, but CPU is, and you can not beat the CPU >> efficiency of plain array lookup (always faster, and constant time). Probably for some old (or embedded) lean boxes used for small netw

[LARTC] Re: tc filter

On 18-08-2006 12:28, Andy Furniss wrote: Jarek Poplawski wrote: Should be: # tc filter add dev eth0 parent 1: proto ip pref 100 \ u32 match ip dst 192.168.1.222 flowid 1: police \ conform-exceed drop/drop Looks a bit iffy but I haven't tried it - I thought that would be

[LARTC] Re: Routing packets over multiple links (NICS) all on the same ISP all with same gateway.

On 16-08-2006 16:18, Jacques Rompen wrote: On 8/16/06, *Jarek Poplawski* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: As far as I know multipath cached should work for routing output of a current box but it's not working for router (if something has n

[LARTC] Re: Routing packets over multiple links (NICS) all on the same ISP all with same gateway.

On 16-08-2006 14:50, Jacques Rompen wrote: ... The 2 ips on every box wouldnt work because: Most people here are complete network newbies, we want to connect more then 8 computers (most people have a laptop and pc), we would only have a 20mbit internal network. Im a bit confused. In the 2.4 ke

[LARTC] Re: tc filter

On 10-08-2006 15:38, Jarek Poplawski wrote: ... # tc filter add dev eth0 parent 1: proto ip pref 100 \ u32 match ip dst 192.168.1.222 police drop Should be: # tc filter add dev eth0 parent 1: proto ip pref 100 \ u32 match ip dst 192.168.1.222 flowid 1: police \ conform-exceed

[LARTC] Re: Routing packets over multiple links (NICS) all on the same ISP all with same gateway.

On 14-08-2006 17:42, Jacques Rompen wrote: ... What we want to do is the following: I live in a student complex with 7 other people. Every room has its own internet connection from the same ISP. Ip, gateway, subnet are asigned through dhcp on mac-adres basis. Every internet connection is capped

[LARTC] Re: tc filter

On 03-08-2006 18:06, doudouyam wrote: Hi, Is it possible to make a filter with tc which exclude an IP like iptables ?? ex: iptable -t mangle -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -d ! 192.168.1.222 -j MARK ... Maybe there is something like this, I don't know, but you can try two filte

[LARTC] Re: route mail through different gateway

On 04-08-2006 04:36, Michael wrote: Hi All, I've got server with one LAN card eth0 ip=10.0.0.5 default access t ointernety done through ADSL router gw 10.0.0.1 we got second internet access through another ADSL router gw 10.0.0.2 I want

[LARTC] Re: how to save iproute

On 01-08-2006 11:28, Oscar Mechanic wrote: Say if I have a few routes like this ip rule add from 19.21.12.12 lookup 200 ip route add default via 10.0.0.253 ip rule add to 13.1.2.2 lookup 201 ip route add default via 10.0.0.254 ip route add default via 10.0.0.254 How do I save them, I have look

[LARTC] Re: problem in Route add using netlink

On 31-07-2006 09:03, Jarek Poplawski wrote: ... Of corse you always have to be sure to have the valid route to Cursed! I wish I could "spel" too: http://www.cherwell.org/of_corse_we_can_spel Jarek P. ___ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailm

[LARTC] Re: problem in Route add using netlink

On 25-07-2006 16:59, VijayaLakshmi Seshadri wrote: Hi all Iam trying to implement "route add " using netlink. The changes are not reflected in the routing table. I have given my code and screen shots of the routing tables. Can anybody tell me is there any mistake iam making in defining the f

[LARTC] Re: Problem with iptables with -j TOS and MARK

On 28-07-2006 15:57, Jarek Poplawski wrote: On 28-07-2006 14:43, makevuy wrote: Hy, I would want to mark the packets that are entering in a machine, with a mark for using diffserv with DSMARK. My machine has 2 interfaces, a ethernet and a wireless. The ethernet interface is eth1 and the

[LARTC] Re: Problem with iptables with -j TOS and MARK

On 28-07-2006 14:43, makevuy wrote: Hy, I would want to mark the packets that are entering in a machine, with a mark for using diffserv with DSMARK. My machine has 2 interfaces, a ethernet and a wireless. The ethernet interface is eth1 and the other is wifi0. Firs, I would want to test tha

[LARTC] Re: Weird HTB behaviour in 2.6.17

On 27-07-2006 19:45, Marlon Dutra wrote: Hello, ... http://mailman.ds9a.nl/pipermail/lartc/2005q3/016981.html In that post, there is another guy with the same problem, but with 2.6.11. I can't see any problem there! If this guy expected lower rate for 1:39 class, he should have lower the

[LARTC] Re: What am I missing?

Ray Van Dolson digitalpath.net> writes: > > On a custom compiled Linux 2.6.13 kernel... > > # tc qdisc add dev ppp145 handle : ingress > # tc filter add dev ppp145 parent : protocol ip prio 50 u32 match ip src 0.0.0.0/0 police rate 384kbit > burst 10k drop flowid :1 > RTNETLINK answers:

[LARTC] Re: QoS doubt about network machine

Nataniel Klug cnett.com.br> writes: > > Hello all, > > I am with a doubt about QoS solution... I have a 4 Mbit backbone > coming from the telco I use... This is the link I serve to my clients, > so I make this classes: > > $TC qdisc add dev $DL root handle 1: htb default 60 > > CLAS

[LARTC] Re: [PATCH] IMQ vs. local traffic

Andy Furniss andyfurniss.entadsl.com> writes: > > Jarek Poplawski wrote: > > > PS: The included patch could be applied after linux-2.6.16-imq2 > > patch or eg. my yesterday version linux-2.6.17.4-imq0. > > I think this should go/cc to the IMQ list > >

[LARTC] Re: [PATCH] IMQ vs. local traffic

Jarek Poplawski wrote: ... And then I've found this strange thing: packets outgoing from lo to any local address are hooked to IMQ queue from PREROUTING (on ingress). I know they are going there from OUTPUT for routing decision and should be delivered to hooks in PREROUTING like IMQ, but

[LARTC] [PATCH] IMQ vs. local traffic

Hello, Some time ago I've read somewhere that local traffic in IMQ could hung up the whole system but it was corrected long time ago. So I was very surprised yesterday when it occurred not true. While testing IMQ I've observed for some time that - if you tag some local traffic with iptables both

[LARTC] [PATCH] IMQ for linux-2.6.17.4 with behavior param

Hi, I see some inertion on www.linuximq.net, while kernels are at full speed, so here is my testing proposition for IMQ with: - some minor bugs removed in imq.c (like improper err handling while registering queue handler), - changes in ipt_IMQ.c and ip6t_IMQ.c to work with linux-2.6.17.4 (ip

[LARTC] Re: Linux Qos : PRIO qdisc works

Sangho Lee wrote: Hi, all I am interested in Linux related QoS, especially PRIO queue discipline (qdisc). ... First question: The TCP stream with higher priority than UDP stream with lower priority experienced starvation in stead of UDP stream. Is it correct? ... All correct: man tc-prio: "

Re: [LARTC] Re: Not understanding network setup!!

Eliot, Wireless and Server Administrator, Great Lakes Internet wrote: -Original Message- From: Jarek Poplawski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 9:57 AM To: Eliot, Wireless and Server Administrator, Great Lakes Internet Cc: lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl Subject: Re: [LARTC

[LARTC] Re: For leaf classes is best PFIFO or SFQ?

Stefano Mainardi wrote: Hi to all, i'm following this guide (http://www.opalsoft.net/qos/DS-28.htm), is very detailed, but i'm a bit confused about queuing disciplinse of leaf classes. In this guide the author uses PFIFO (see the scheme that i attached at message) in this way: # tc class add de

[LARTC] Re: Not understanding network setup!!

Eliot, Wireless and Server Administrator, Great Lakes Internet wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 2:58 PM To: lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl Subject: [LARTC] Not understanding network setup!! H

[LARTC] IMQ on KPTD

IMQ patch by Patrick McHardy from www.linuximq.net. Best regards, Jarek Poplawski ___ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc