[LARTC] How to make external loopback with 2 interfaces
Hello For testing purposes, i would like to make a connection between 2 network interfaces on the same machine. For example, i have eth0 (10.0.0.100) and eth1 (10.0.0.101) and would like to have the traffic going on the wire, not just taking the shortcut inside the protocol stack. I have played around a little bit with the routing table, but did not succeed. Does Linux and/or the associated network tools support such strange requirements and if yes how to i setup the routing table? TIA Dave ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Re: [LARTC] How to make external loopback with 2 interfaces
You would have to hack the IP layer for that AFAIK. I need the same thing for a device driver I am writing and the only way to do this seem to be bypassing the IP layer optimization which basically says If the destination IP is one of my interfaces, pick up pkt from xmit queue and put it in recv queue ciao, Amit On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, David Müller wrote: Hello For testing purposes, i would like to make a connection between 2 network interfaces on the same machine. For example, i have eth0 (10.0.0.100) and eth1 (10.0.0.101) and would like to have the traffic going on the wire, not just taking the shortcut inside the protocol stack. I have played around a little bit with the routing table, but did not succeed. Does Linux and/or the associated network tools support such strange requirements and if yes how to i setup the routing table? TIA Dave ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ -- I'm an angel!!! Honest! The horns are just there to hold the halo up straight. ^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^ Amit Kucheria EECS Grad. Research Assistant University of Kansas @ Lawrence (R): +1-785-830-8521 ||| (C): +1-785-760-2871 ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
[LARTC] Bandwidth allocation by IP
I have a LAN (eth1) and 1Mbit internet which is very unstable (from 100kbit - 2mbit) on eth0. I would like to prevent ip A downloading with 9 threads taking 90% bandwidth and ip B downloading with 1 thread taking 10%. I would like ip A as well as ip B to have each 50% of bandwith no care how many threads they are downloading. I suppose that it could be done on eth1. But how? Second problem: I want to lessen round-trips. Should I do it with priorizing small packets on eth0? How? I have 2.4.18, iproute2 with extra htb. PSCHED_JIFFIES (unfortunately - it's only AMD 160MHz and does not have TSC) Thanks -- Vladimir Trebicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Odchozi zprava neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolovno antivirovm systmem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.368 / Virov bze: 204 - datum vydn: 29.5.2002 ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
[LARTC] New Qdisc
I want to creat a new qdisc ,i'm using red hat 7.2 if i do this (new qdisc) i think that i have to write only the function that are related with qdisc as enqueue,dequeue,drop,requeue? in addition, how can i integreted this new qdisc in the Iproute2, how can i do this link? and whitch file i have to change or to update??? ___ Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français ! Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Re: [LARTC] Bandwidth allocation by IP
Try WRR on eth1 see http://wipl-wrr.sourceforge.net/ for details or use ESFQ see mail from Alexander Atanasov 05.06.2002 I rename files gzip its and attach to this mail but don't change anything patch kernel and tc cd iproute2 patch -p1 ../esfq-tc.diff cd linux-2.4.18 patch -p1 ../esfq-2.4.18.diff recompile kernel and tc thats all !! see README Note it give you equal division for a long term not at the moment Example: tc qdisc add dev eth1 root handle 1:0 esfq hash src It make equal priority for session based on ip address not tcp session like classic SFQ For detail see SFQ 05.06.2002 15:34:05, Vladimir Trebicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a LAN (eth1) and 1Mbit internet which is very unstable (from 100kbit - 2mbit) on eth0. I would like to prevent ip A downloading with 9 threads taking 90% bandwidth and ip B downloading with 1 thread taking 10%. I would like ip A as well as ip B to have each 50% of bandwith no care how many threads they are downloading. I suppose that it could be done on eth1. But how? Second problem: I want to lessen round-trips. Should I do it with priorizing small packets on eth0? How? I have 2.4.18, iproute2 with extra htb. PSCHED_JIFFIES (unfortunately - it's only AMD 160MHz and does not have TSC) Thanks -- Vladimir Trebicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Odchozi zprava neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolovno antivirovm systmem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.368 / Virov bze: 204 - datum vydn: 29.5.2002 ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ --- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] BR Alexey Talikov FORTEK --- esfq.tar.gz Description: GNU Zip compressed data
Re: [LARTC] New Qdisc
On Wednesday 05 June 2002 12:35, alouini khalif wrote: I want to creat a new qdisc ,i'm using red hat 7.2 if i do this (new qdisc) i think that i have to write only the function that are related with qdisc as enqueue,dequeue,drop,requeue? in addition, how can i integreted this new qdisc in the Iproute2, how can i do this link? and whitch file i have to change or to update??? Maybe you can take a look at the htb qdisc to see how it's done : http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/qos/htb/ Stef -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using Linux as bandwidth manager http://www.docum.org/ #lartc @ irc.openprojects.net ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Re: [LARTC] Bandwidth allocation by IP
Hi there! On Wed, 05 Jun 2002 16:19:41 +0500 Alexey Talikov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I rename files gzip its and attach to this mail but don't change anything patch kernel and tc I'll put them somewhere on the web tonight and provide an url. Note it give you equal division for a long term not at the moment Example: tc qdisc add dev eth1 root handle 1:0 esfq hash src It make equal priority for session based on ip address not tcp session like classic SFQ For detail see SFQ Note that sfq is on egress and client IPs are destinations, not sources, so you should use dst hash to divide bandwidth between clients, if you use src hash you have equal priority on server flows not on clients ones: client A downloads from server X and from server Y, client B downloads from server Z - you have bandwidth devided to X:Y:Z, not A:B, since downloads are coming from X/Y/Z(source) to A/B(destination). -- have fun, alex P.S. Thank you for the feedback and trying it. :) ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
[LARTC] Problems with routes
Whenever I try to 'readd' a route I receive an error and I can't figure out why... # Add some routes ip route add $EXT via $INT ip route add prio 320 from $INT nat $EXT # Delete them ip route del from $INT nat $EXT ip route del $EXT via $INT # Add again ip route add $EXT via $INT ip route add prio 320 from $INT nat $EXT The last command exits with exit-code '2' and the message: RTNETLINK answers: Invalid argument What am I doing wrong? -- Alexander Brill [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.project23.no PGP-key: http://alexb.egil.org/key.pub signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [LARTC] New Qdisc
And also if you feel to be able to write new qdisc then I'd expect that you are able to find places to rewrite quickly. As Stef suggested, in HTB patch you will see all modified files. devik On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Stef Coene wrote: On Wednesday 05 June 2002 12:35, alouini khalif wrote: I want to creat a new qdisc ,i'm using red hat 7.2 if i do this (new qdisc) i think that i have to write only the function that are related with qdisc as enqueue,dequeue,drop,requeue? in addition, how can i integreted this new qdisc in the Iproute2, how can i do this link? and whitch file i have to change or to update??? Maybe you can take a look at the htb qdisc to see how it's done : http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/qos/htb/ Stef -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using Linux as bandwidth manager http://www.docum.org/ #lartc @ irc.openprojects.net ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Re: [LARTC] Bandwidth allocation by IP
use latest version iproute2-2.4.7-now-ss020116-try it work without problem (for me) esfq is more simple in configuration that wrr but in wrr more features for traffic control and its use another principle read more about WRR and also see doc in package wrr and see http://docum.org/. 05.06.2002 18:09:07, Vladimir Trebicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That sound like something what I exactly need. 1) what is the difference (adv disadv) between esfq and wrr? 2) little problem in attachment, I don't know what to do. I tried latest (that 2002-try) and latest stable version (ss010824). Try WRR on eth1 see http://wipl-wrr.sourceforge.net/ for details or use ESFQ see mail from Alexander Atanasov 05.06.2002 I rename files gzip its and attach to this mail but don't change anything patch kernel and tc cd iproute2 patch -p1 ../esfq-tc.diff cd linux-2.4.18 patch -p1 ../esfq-2.4.18.diff recompile kernel and tc thats all !! see README Note it give you equal division for a long term not at the moment Example: tc qdisc add dev eth1 root handle 1:0 esfq hash src It make equal priority for session based on ip address not tcp session like classic SFQ For detail see SFQ 05.06.2002 15:34:05, Vladimir Trebicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a LAN (eth1) and 1Mbit internet which is very unstable (from 100kbit - 2mbit) on eth0. I would like to prevent ip A downloading with 9 threads taking 90% bandwidth and ip B downloading with 1 thread taking 10%. I would like ip A as well as ip B to have each 50% of bandwith no care how many threads they are downloading. I suppose that it could be done on eth1. But how? Second problem: I want to lessen round-trips. Should I do it with priorizing small packets on eth0? How? I have 2.4.18, iproute2 with extra htb. PSCHED_JIFFIES (unfortunately - it's only AMD 160MHz and does not have TSC) Thanks -- Vladimir Trebicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Odchozi zprava neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolov?no antivirov?m syst?mem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.368 / Virov? b?ze: 204 - datum vyd?n?: 29.5.2002 ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ --- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] BR Alexey Talikov FORTEK --- --- Odchozi zprava neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolov?no antivirov?m syst?mem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.368 / Virov? b?ze: 204 - datum vyd?n?: 29.5.2002 --- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] BR Alexey Talikov FORTEK --- ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
[LARTC] incompabilities with different routing tables and ipv6?
Hello! I've checked in the LARTC-guide on how to let different traffic take different routes depending on the port. I've managed to do the same for the TOS-flag. Now I want to do the same thing with IPv6. When I try to add a new default gateway to the table host2.out I do the following: # echo 201 host2.out /etc/iproute2/rt_tables # ip rule add fwmark 1 table host2.out # ip -6 route add default via fec0::195.96.98.253 dev eth1 table host2.out The interesting part is the last statement. I want to use different tables with IPv6. When I do: # ip -6 route ls table host2.out it returns nothing When I do: # ip -6 route add default via fec0::195.96.98.253 dev eth1 table host2.out I get: RNETLINK: File already exists My conclusion is that somehow the entry is registred but wont show. My question is: Is there any incompabilities between different routing tables and IPv6? Sincerily, Gabriel Paues Swedish Institue of Computer Science ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
[LARTC] SFQ buckets/extensions
... What if SFQ were to start with a minimal number of buckets, and track how 'deep' each bucket was, then go to a larger number of bits (2/4 at a time?) if the buckets hit a certain depth? Theoretically, this would mean that 'fairness' would be achieved more often in current collision situations but that a smaller number of buckets would be necessary to achieve fairness in currently low-collision situations. I haven't looked at the SFQ code in a while, so I don't know how much benefit this would be in terms of processing time, or even how expensive it would be to change hash sizes on the fly, but at a certain level of resolution (+/- 2-4 bits), the changes wouldn't be terribly frequent anyway. A few reactions: - The only runtime cost of lots of buckets is a small amount of storage for each bucket. Allocating buckets at runtime also introduces the problem that you could run out of space. - There's no advantage to having many more buckets that the number of packets you're willing to queue, which is typically only on the order of a few hundred. extensions And all the discussions tend to lead to the conclusion that there should be an sfq option (when the queue is created) for: a) how big the hash is b) whether to take into account source ports or not c) whether to take into account destination ports or not d) etc. :) Maybe someone who's written a qdisc would feel up to this? I've been hoping to get to it, since I have other stuff I'd like to incorporate into a new sfq version. From: Alexander Atanasov [EMAIL PROTECTED] I've done some in this direction , probably needs more work, and it's poorly tested - expect b00ms ;) This adds a new qdisc for now - esfq which is a 100% clone of original sfq. - You can set all sfq parameters: hash table size, queue depths, queue limits. - You can choose from 3 hash types: original(classic), dst ip, src ip. Things to consider: perturbation with dst and src hashes is not good IMHO, you can try with perturb 0 if it couses trouble. Please, see the attached files. Plaing with it gives interesting results: higher depth - makes flows equal slower small depth - makes flows equal faster limit kills big delays when set at about 75-85% of depth. I don't understand what these last three lines mean. Could you explain? Needs testings and mesurements - that's why i made it separate qdisc and not a patch over sfq, i wanted to compare both. Any feedback good or bad is welcome. I'll send you my current module, also a variant of SFQ. It contains doc that I think is worth including, also changes some of the code to be more understandable, separates the number of packets allowed in the queue from the number of buckets, supports the time limit (discussed in earlier messages), controls these things via /proc, maybe a few other things I'm forgetting. This version does not support hashing on different properties of the packet, cause it uses a totally different criterion for identifying subclasses of traffic. You can discard that and restore the sfq hash with your modifications. I think (hope) these changes are pretty much independent. ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Re: [LARTC] Bandwidth allocation by IP
ESFQ !? Did I missed something ? :-) devik On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Alexey Talikov wrote: use latest version iproute2-2.4.7-now-ss020116-try it work without problem (for me) esfq is more simple in configuration that wrr but in wrr more features for traffic control and its use another principle read more about WRR and also see doc in package wrr and see http://docum.org/. 05.06.2002 18:09:07, Vladimir Trebicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That sound like something what I exactly need. 1) what is the difference (adv disadv) between esfq and wrr? 2) little problem in attachment, I don't know what to do. I tried latest (that 2002-try) and latest stable version (ss010824). Try WRR on eth1 see http://wipl-wrr.sourceforge.net/ for details or use ESFQ see mail from Alexander Atanasov 05.06.2002 I rename files gzip its and attach to this mail but don't change anything patch kernel and tc cd iproute2 patch -p1 ../esfq-tc.diff cd linux-2.4.18 patch -p1 ../esfq-2.4.18.diff recompile kernel and tc thats all !! see README Note it give you equal division for a long term not at the moment Example: tc qdisc add dev eth1 root handle 1:0 esfq hash src It make equal priority for session based on ip address not tcp session like classic SFQ For detail see SFQ 05.06.2002 15:34:05, Vladimir Trebicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a LAN (eth1) and 1Mbit internet which is very unstable (from 100kbit - 2mbit) on eth0. I would like to prevent ip A downloading with 9 threads taking 90% bandwidth and ip B downloading with 1 thread taking 10%. I would like ip A as well as ip B to have each 50% of bandwith no care how many threads they are downloading. I suppose that it could be done on eth1. But how? Second problem: I want to lessen round-trips. Should I do it with priorizing small packets on eth0? How? I have 2.4.18, iproute2 with extra htb. PSCHED_JIFFIES (unfortunately - it's only AMD 160MHz and does not have TSC) Thanks -- Vladimir Trebicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Odchozi zprava neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolov?no antivirov?m syst?mem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.368 / Virov? b?ze: 204 - datum vyd?n?: 29.5.2002 ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ --- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] BR Alexey Talikov FORTEK --- --- Odchozi zprava neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolov?no antivirov?m syst?mem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.368 / Virov? b?ze: 204 - datum vyd?n?: 29.5.2002 --- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] BR Alexey Talikov FORTEK --- ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Re: [LARTC] Bandwidth allocation by IP
Sorry for my incompetence. I didn't noticed that readme included in some of Alexes posts. Module works fine only if I do qdisc add dev eth1 root handle 1: esfq when I do qdisc add dev eth1 root handle 1: esfq hash dst the computer get totally freezed. - Original Message - From: Alexey Talikov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Vladimir Trebicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 1:19 PM Subject: Re: [LARTC] Bandwidth allocation by IP Try WRR on eth1 see http://wipl-wrr.sourceforge.net/ for details or use ESFQ see mail from Alexander Atanasov 05.06.2002 I rename files gzip its and attach to this mail but don't change anything patch kernel and tc cd iproute2 patch -p1 ../esfq-tc.diff cd linux-2.4.18 patch -p1 ../esfq-2.4.18.diff recompile kernel and tc thats all !! see README Note it give you equal division for a long term not at the moment Example: tc qdisc add dev eth1 root handle 1:0 esfq hash src It make equal priority for session based on ip address not tcp session like classic SFQ For detail see SFQ 05.06.2002 15:34:05, Vladimir Trebicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a LAN (eth1) and 1Mbit internet which is very unstable (from 100kbit - 2mbit) on eth0. I would like to prevent ip A downloading with 9 threads taking 90% bandwidth and ip B downloading with 1 thread taking 10%. I would like ip A as well as ip B to have each 50% of bandwith no care how many threads they are downloading. I suppose that it could be done on eth1. But how? Second problem: I want to lessen round-trips. Should I do it with priorizing small packets on eth0? How? I have 2.4.18, iproute2 with extra htb. PSCHED_JIFFIES (unfortunately - it's only AMD 160MHz and does not have TSC) Thanks -- Vladimir Trebicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Odchozi zprava neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolovno antivirovm systmem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.368 / Virov bze: 204 - datum vydn: 29.5.2002 ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ --- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] BR Alexey Talikov FORTEK --- --- Odchozi zprava neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolovno antivirovm systmem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.368 / Virov bze: 204 - datum vydn: 29.5.2002 ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Re: [LARTC] installing HTB
On Wednesday 05 June 2002 20:33, Chris K Ellsworth wrote: when i go to install htb i know i need to patch the kernel (DONE) and do i need grab the iprotue2+tc and patch then make or just use the tc binary from the tgz file and replace the tc file curently located on the system? You also need to patch iproute and compile a new tc binary. Stef -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using Linux as bandwidth manager http://www.docum.org/ #lartc @ irc.openprojects.net ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Re: [LARTC] simple htb script which does not work
On Wednesday 05 June 2002 18:10, Ludovic Drolez wrote: Hi ! I'm using the htb.init script to do simple things with my adsl connection: - uploads through a VPN (port 2001 used) can use all BW (128Kbits) (rate=15kbps, ceil=16kbps), class 10 - and others have only 8 kbits but can take all the BW if there is no VPN activity. (rate=1kbps, ceil=16kps), class 20 But, BW sharing does not seem to work, and if I make 2 uploads, one through the VPN, the other with ssh on the net, I get 8kbps/8kbps instead of 15kbps/1kbps. Some stats show that packets are filtered the right way. Any idea ? You need to shape lower then 16kbps so you never use the full bandwidth. Otherwise, the queues on you modem will be filled and it will be the modem that controls the bandwidth. The scripts is OK. Stef -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using Linux as bandwidth manager http://www.docum.org/ #lartc @ irc.openprojects.net ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Re: [LARTC] Problems with routes
Hello, On 5 Jun 2002, Alexander Brill wrote: Whenever I try to 'readd' a route I receive an error and I can't figure out why... # Add some routes ip route add $EXT via $INT ip route add prio 320 from $INT nat $EXT ip rule add prio 320 from $INT nat $EXT # Delete them ip route del from $INT nat $EXT ip route del prio 320 from $INT nat $EXT ip route del $EXT via $INT # Add again ip route add $EXT via $INT ip route add prio 320 from $INT nat $EXT ip rule add prio 320 from $INT nat $EXT The last command exits with exit-code '2' and the message: RTNETLINK answers: Invalid argument May be not only the last one :) What am I doing wrong? Use ip rules for SNAT and ip routes for DNAT Regards -- Julian Anastasov [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Re: [LARTC] installing HTB
OR you can use binary in tar - the iproute compilation is not needed then. devik On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Stef Coene wrote: On Wednesday 05 June 2002 20:33, Chris K Ellsworth wrote: when i go to install htb i know i need to patch the kernel (DONE) and do i need grab the iprotue2+tc and patch then make or just use the tc binary from the tgz file and replace the tc file curently located on the system? You also need to patch iproute and compile a new tc binary. Stef -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using Linux as bandwidth manager http://www.docum.org/ #lartc @ irc.openprojects.net ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Re: [LARTC] Bandwidth allocation by IP
Hi there! On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Vladimir Trebicky wrote: Sorry for my incompetence. I didn't noticed that readme included in some of Alexes posts. Module works fine only if I do qdisc add dev eth1 root handle 1: esfq when I do qdisc add dev eth1 root handle 1: esfq hash dst the computer get totally freezed. Are you sure you've build the kernel correct? I've fixed some things about default parameters - i think you've hit this, hash_divisor was left to be 0 when not supplied as parameter. Now works and as built in - forgot to include sch_api.c when making diff first time, so it was in kernel but not registerd. I've setup a page for it on: http://www.ssi.bg/~alex/esfq/index.html -- have fun, alex ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Re: [LARTC] SFQ buckets/extensions
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Don Cohen wrote: extensions And all the discussions tend to lead to the conclusion that there should be an sfq option (when the queue is created) for: a) how big the hash is b) whether to take into account source ports or not c) whether to take into account destination ports or not d) etc. :) Maybe someone who's written a qdisc would feel up to this? I've been hoping to get to it, since I have other stuff I'd like to incorporate into a new sfq version. At first look - i think i've have to incorporate my changes into your work. I've not done much just added hashes and unlocked what Alexey Kuznetsov did. Plaing with it gives interesting results: higher depth - makes flows equal slower small depth - makes flows equal faster limit kills big delays when set at about 75-85% of depth. I don't understand what these last three lines mean. Could you explain? depth is how much packets which are queued on a row of the hash table. If you have large queues (higher depth) sfq reacts slower when a new flow appears (it has to do more work to make queue lengths equal ). When you have short queues it reacts faster, so adjusting depth to your bandwidth and traffic type can make it do better work. I set bounded cbq class 320kbits and esfq with dst hash: Start an upload - it gets 40KB Start second one - it should get 20KB asap to be fair. With depth 128 it would take it let's say 6 sec. to make both 20KB, with depth 64 about 3sec - drop packets early with shorter queue. (i've to make some exact measurements since this is just an example and may not be correct). limit sets a threshold on queued packets - if a packet exceeds it's dropped so delay is smaller, but when it tries to make flows equal it counts depth, not limit. With above example depth 128 and limit 100: When first upload enqueue 100 packets sfq starts to drop, but goal to make flows equal is 64 packets in queue. Flow doesn't get the 28 packets which are to be enqueued and delayed for a long time and probably dropped when recived. It's similiar to RED - you have a queue which you try to keep at about X percent full but can go over it, limit keeps it at most X percent full. What about making it like RED - more packets go over limit more are droped early - limit goes down, less are dropped - limit goes up? Needs testings and mesurements - that's why i made it separate qdisc and not a patch over sfq, i wanted to compare both. Any feedback good or bad is welcome. I'll send you my current module, also a variant of SFQ. It contains doc that I think is worth including, also changes some of the code to be more understandable, separates the number of packets allowed in the queue from the number of buckets, supports the time limit (discussed in earlier messages), controls these things via /proc, maybe a few other things I'm forgetting. This version does not support hashing on different properties of the packet, cause it uses a totally different criterion for identifying subclasses of traffic. You can discard that and restore the sfq hash with your modifications. I think (hope) these changes are pretty much independent. I've taken a quick look over it and i like the ideas there, give me some time to get the details. I hope we can make something good of both. -- have fun, alex ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
[LARTC] parameter of htb
tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: htb default 12 tc class add dev eth0 parent 1: classid 1:10 rate 30kbps ceil 100kbps burst 2k tc class add dev eth0 parent 1: classid 1:11 rate 10kbps ceil 100kbps burst 2k tc class add dev eth0 parent 1: classid 1:12 rate 60kbps ceil 100kbps burst 2k tc filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 1 u32 match ip src 172.16.11.2 flowid 1:10 i login 172.16.11.2 and copy a large file from the server set traffic control. tc -s -d qdisc show dev eth0 qdisc htb 1 dev eth0 r2q 10 default 12 direct_packets_stat 0 Sent 34210198 bytes 23370 pkts(dropped 0 overlimits 35534) first question: what is meaning of r2q and direct_packets_stat tc -s -d class dev eth0 class htb 1:11 root prio 0 quantum 3072 rate 240kbit ceil 800kbit burst 2kb/8 mpu 0b cburst 2636b/8 mpu 0b level 0 Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts(dropped 0 overlimits 0) lended:0 borrowed:0 giants:0 tokens:54612 ctokens 20992 class htb 1:10 root prio 0 quantum 3072 rate 240kbit ceil 800kbit burst 2kb/8 mpu 0b cburst 2636b/8 mpu 0b level 0 Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts(dropped 0 overlimits 0) lended:0 borrowed:0 giants:0 tokens:54612 ctokens 20992 class htb 1:12 root prio 0 quantum 3072 rate 240kbit ceil 800kbit burst 2kb/8 mpu 0b cburst 2636b/8 mpu 0b level 0 Sent 34210198 bytes 23370 pkts(dropped 0 overlimits 0) rate 190kbps lended:23370 borrowed:0 giants:0 tokens:-24351 ctokens 20480 !!!second question: what is meaning of token and ctoken !!!why all three class'rate become 30kbps? !!!why all packets belong to class 1:12 ,they should belong to class 1:10. _ Do You Yahoo!? 2002ÄêÊÀ½ç±ÈºÐÛ÷éÕ½ ÑÅ»¢Öйú¾Û½¹ÈÕº« http://cn.fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/ ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Re: [LARTC] SFQ buckets/extensions
Alexander Atanasov writes: At first look - i think i've have to incorporate my changes into your work. I've not done much just added hashes and unlocked what Alexey Kuznetsov did. Not quite that simple. You have to throw out about half of my file, mostly the last third or so, which replaces the hash function, plus most of the /proc stuff, and probably a lot of other little pieces scattered here and there. I now recall a few other things - I support configuration of sevice weights for different subqueues, which makes no sense for sfq, also I record the amount of service (bytes and packets) per subqueue and report these to the tc -s -d stuff, which also makes no sense for sfq. After removing all that stuff you then have to restore the hash. Plaing with it gives interesting results: higher depth - makes flows equal slower small depth - makes flows equal faster limit kills big delays when set at about 75-85% of depth. I don't understand what these last three lines mean. Could you explain? depth is how much packets which are queued on a row of the hash table. If you have large queues (higher depth) sfq reacts slower when a new flow appears (it has to do more work to make queue lengths equal ). When you have short queues it reacts faster, so adjusting depth to your bandwidth and traffic type can make it do better work. I set bounded cbq class 320kbits and esfq with dst hash: Start an upload - it gets 40KB Start second one - it should get 20KB asap to be fair. With depth 128 it would take it let's say 6 sec. to make both 20KB, with depth 64 about 3sec - drop packets early with shorter queue. (i've to make some exact measurements since this is just an example and may not be correct). I don't see why that should be the case. And I don't recall ever observing it. This adaptation time should be practically zero. There's no work in making the queues equal. (Let's use the word queue to mean the whole SFQ and subqueue for the part sharing a hash index.) If you have, say, 100 packets in one subqueue and 10 in another they're already sharing the bandwidth 50-50. limit sets a threshold on queued packets - if a packet exceeds it's dropped so delay is smaller, but when it tries to make flows equal it counts depth, not limit. With above example depth 128 and limit 100: When first upload enqueue 100 packets sfq starts to drop, but goal to make flows equal is 64 packets in queue. Flow doesn't get the 28 packets which are to be enqueued and delayed for a long time and probably dropped when recived. I disagree that the goal is to make the subqueues the same length. The goal is to serve them with the same bandwidth (as long as they don't become empty.) Queue length depends on how many packets each download is willing to send without an ack. If one is willing to send 100 and the other is willing to send 10, then the subqueues will likely be length 100 and 10, but each will still get the same bandwidth. Without window scaling the max window size is 64K which is only about 45 packets, so it's not really normal to have 100 packets in a subqueue. ___ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
