Re: [LARTC] how to change classful netem loss probability?
And if its not possible to change the probability, is there another method I can use instead? > Hi, > > I am using netem to add loss and then adding another qdisc within netem > according to the wiki. Then i want to change the netem drop probability > without having to delete the qdisc and recreate it. I try it but I get > invalid argument: > > thorium-ini hedpe # tc qdisc add dev ath0 root handle 1:0 netem drop 1% > thorium-ini hedpe # tc qdisc add dev ath0 parent 1:1 handle 10: xcp > capacity 54Mbit limit 500 thorium-ini hedpe # tc -s qdisc ls dev ath0 qdisc > netem 1: limit 1000 loss 1% Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0) > qdisc xcp 10: parent 1:1 capacity 52734Kbit limit 500p Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts > (dropped 0, overlimits 0) thorium-ini hedpe # tc qdisc change dev ath0 > root handle 1:0 netem drop 1% RTNETLINK answers: Invalid argument > thorium-ini hedpe # tc qdisc change dev ath0 root netem drop 1% RTNETLINK > answers: Invalid argument > > any ideas? > > Thanks! George ___ LARTC mailing > list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl > http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc > > -- ___ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
[LARTC] MULTIPATH: how to control chache expiration time?
I have a 2.6.12(ubuntu-patchset), kernel recompiled with this routing options: [*] IP: advanced router [*] IP: policy routing [*] IP: equal cost multipath Load balancing is working great, but i have problems whits long term tcp flows (like msn-messenger or vpns or any other type of long term ip based conection). I assume this is because after a period of time, the per-host route cache expires and packets get re-routed, sometimes unfortunley, from a diferent iface. It is to remark that i'm not doing NAT in this box, just routing, the nat is done in each of the nexthops listed(so, no julian's patches applied). i've found[1] that: /proc/sys/net/ipv4/route/secret_interval "instructs the kernel how often to blow away ALL route hash entries regardless of how new/old they are" - Put the secret_interval to 1 day, will solve my problem?, cause i think that neither a day is enough (i have ssh sessions open for more than that) - There are other values i have to have in consideration?(route tables cache/hash size/mem) -Do someone knows a better aprouch? Another thing(besides the previous problem) is that if i compile the kernel whit (CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH_CACHED) enabled: [*] IP: equal cost multipath with caching support (EXPERIMENTAL) The multipath sotps working and all packets get routed to the las iface in the nexthops statements. I try compiling the four multipath modules/algos an modprobing its, but same result. Because of that i have to go back to equal cost multipath whit CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH_CACHED disabled. If someone can give me a hint on this will be nice to, because some thing keeps etching. (sorry if this is not pure english) [1]http://lwn.net/Articles/145406/ Just in case some commands output: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/backup/ftp# ip ro ls table adsl 192.168.10.37 via 192.168.90.3 dev eth2 192.168.100.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.100.1 192.168.50.0/24 dev eth2 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.50.1 192.168.3.0/24 dev eth6 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.3.2 192.168.2.0/24 dev eth5 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.2.2 192.168.1.0/24 dev eth4 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.1.2 192.168.90.0/24 dev eth2 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.90.1 default proto static nexthop via 192.168.1.1 dev eth4 weight 1 nexthop via 192.168.2.1 dev eth5 weight 1 nexthop via 192.168.3.1 dev eth6 weight 1 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/backup/ftp# ip ro show cache | egrep 'eth4|eth5|eth6' -B1 | tail -n20 201.216.128.100 from 192.168.90.5 via 192.168.3.1 dev eth6 src 192.168.90.1 -- 192.168.90.5 from 201.240.149.1 dev eth2 src 192.168.1.2 cache mtu 1500 advmss 1460 hoplimit 64 iif eth5 -- cache mtu 1500 advmss 1460 hoplimit 64 iif eth2 200.114.138.45 from 192.168.90.5 via 192.168.1.1 dev eth4 src 192.168.90.1 -- 192.168.90.5 from 200.74.39.52 dev eth2 src 192.168.1.2 cache mtu 1500 advmss 1460 hoplimit 64 iif eth5 71.80.214.141 from 192.168.90.5 via 192.168.1.1 dev eth4 src 192.168.90.1 -- cache mtu 1500 advmss 1460 hoplimit 64 iif eth2 24.86.57.13 from 192.168.90.5 via 192.168.1.1 dev eth4 src 192.168.90.1 -- 192.168.90.5 from 69.66.58.31 dev eth2 src 192.168.1.2 cache mtu 1500 advmss 1460 hoplimit 64 iif eth5 -- 192.168.90.5 from 61.228.9.180 dev eth2 src 192.168.1.2 cache mtu 1500 advmss 1460 hoplimit 64 iif eth4 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/backup/ftp# grep ROUTE /boot/config-2.6.12-luciano.1 CONFIG_IP_ADVANCED_ROUTER=y CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_FWMARK=y CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH=y # CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH_CACHED is not set CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_VERBOSE=y CONFIG_IP_MROUTE=y CONFIG_BRIDGE_EBT_BROUTE=m # CONFIG_DECNET_ROUTER is not set CONFIG_WAN_ROUTER=m CONFIG_NET_CLS_ROUTE4=m CONFIG_NET_CLS_ROUTE=y CONFIG_WAN_ROUTER_DRIVERS=y [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/backup/ftp# ___ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
[LARTC] A doubt
HII am working in a project and i needed to know if the combination HTB+SFQ, works well..So i started to do a test with tcng.I put during 20 minutes 4 types of traffic between 2 computers, a http file transfer, a ftp file transfer, a tftp file transer and a ssh interactive transfer. In all the protocols with file transfer (FTP, HTTP, TFTP) i obtained good results, the percentage of bandwidth was looked like previously formed, but in the ssh interactive transfer, the real percentage of bandwidth was extremely superior to the formed percentage. Do some of you know if is the interactive traffic well supported with this queueing disciplines?-- Juan Felipe Botero Ingeniero de sistemasUniversidad de Antioquia ___ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
RES: RES: [LARTC] Backlog with less rate than defined
Hi Andy, I changed the configuration with no default on htb, sending unmatched ip packets to a limited queue. It´s now working fine. Thanks a lot. Luciano -Mensagem original- De: Andy Furniss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Enviada em: terça-feira, 25 de abril de 2006 20:16 Para: Luciano Cc: lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Assunto: Re: RES: [LARTC] Backlog with less rate than defined Luciano wrote: > Hi Andy, > > I´m not sure if I understood what you told about arp packets. > I use htb default but the problem occurs even when the default queue > rate is low (it is almost always low in rate and pps). It's still not ideal even if it's not the cause - sfq default length is 128 packets so if they were mtu size when it's full thats 1.5sec delay + drops - and the stats show drops. class htb 1:efff parent 1:1 leaf efff: prio 1 rate 1Mbit ceil 1Mbit burst 2909b cburst 2909b Sent 1113213839 bytes 9059857 pkts (dropped 61529, overlimits 0) rate 1130bps 13pps lended: 9059857 borrowed: 0 giants: 0 I would not use default on eth. Also 100mbit eth is not 100mbit at ip level, which is almost what htb sees (ip+14), so 1:1 needs to be less - but if children don't add up to that then it won't hurt. You could just send all unmatched ip to 1:efff with a low prio filter - tc filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 99 u32 match u32 0 0 flowid 1:efff then arp will not get shaped. I notice you use handle on filters maybe OK but I usually only see it with hashing or fw. > > The attached files are: > Rc.local - criation of the basic queues including default > Regras.inc - criation of each queue when the user login > Queues - statistics of the basic queues Have you measured the rate another way? Andy. ___ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
[LARTC] Is there ping2?
Hi, I would like to set up access to Internet via two providers. When they both works OK I use ip route add default scope global nexthop via x.x.x.x dev eth0 weight 1 nexthop via y.y.y.y.y dev eth1 weight 1 Next, I use script that regularly pings their upper providers for see if some of providers are down. If one is down I want to guide all communications via other interface. If second one is down - ip route del default ip route add default via x.x.x.x It works OK but at that moment I can't ping any nonlocal address thru eth1 so I can't check when provider come up. ping z.z.z.z -I eth1 - gives nothing Tcpdump shows that eth1 broadcast arp request for nonlocal address ?!? Tables for both interfaces are setup correctly and it seems that ping checks only main table. At same time when haven't default route via provider and that provider is up, all communication initialized by peers on Internet going on nondefault interface, even pings, works OK. When the default routes manually sets back to go thru both ones it comes back to normal . One more strange thing is that my script works OK for over one year until I have to change netmask and default gw for one provider. TIA, Darko ___ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
Re: [LARTC] Unsubscribe
At the bottom of every single e-mail on this list are directions on how to correctly unsubscribe. Could you please not make a fool of yourself (twice) and actually read them? - Jody ___ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
