Hello,
I'm using HTB (through htb.init :) and it's nearly perfect, but the CEIL
directive seems to have no effect.
The relevant lines are:
tc qdisc add dev eth1 root handle 1 htb default 10 r2q 100
tc class add dev eth1 parent 1: classid 1:2 htb rate 5Mbit burst 15k
tc class add dev eth1 parent
i want to priorize UDP on eth0 internal and eth1 external interfaces.
which command i have to use? can u write me an example?
___
LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
> - Ingress support (egress qdiscs can be used for ingress traffic control!)
Ehh, I can't believe it !!
Yahgo
___
LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Oops, forgot to reply to the list.
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Martin Devera wrote:
> Also why there are four imqs ? I can't find way how to
> direct packet to partiticular one
The IMQ iptables target has an option --todev to specify
to which imq device a packet should go. if it's not specified
it
good work ;) Please change Devara=>Devera .. I also
changed original page http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/qos/imq.htm
to mention your new one at beginning.
Also why there are four imqs ? I can't find way how to
direct packet to partiticular one
devik
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>
"Mihai RUSU" wrote
> Hi
>
> While reading the HOWTO (pdf downloaded and printed last night) I have
> noticed a little strange thing. In the 9.2.1 chapter, explaining the
> pfifo_fast qdisc, it is shown a TOS field mapping table and also it
> appears a command line version:
>
> "The last column sh
Hi!
I've completed a pre-release of the new IMQ device.
Changes include:
- Multiple IMQ devices
- Selection of what gets queued to which device is done using an iptables
target, nothing gets queued be default
- Ingress support (egress qdiscs can be used for ingress traffic control!)
- Poss
Julián Muñoz([EMAIL PROTECTED])@Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 01:14:44PM +:
> On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Vincent AE Scott wrote:
>
> > i have no experience with the products you mention, but there was a
> > comparsion made recently on this list between PIX and linux advanaced
> > routing features. The archi
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Vincent AE Scott wrote:
> i have no experience with the products you mention, but there was a
> comparsion made recently on this list between PIX and linux advanaced
> routing features. The archives are located here:
>
> http://mailman.ds9a.nl/pipermail/lartc/
I doesn't fin
simbo adeyemi([EMAIL PROTECTED])@Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 10:30:48AM -0800:
>
> pls, i'd like to perform traffic shapping and bandwidth allocation on my
> linux server.
> I want to be able to do everything that a device like packeteer
> floodgate's)and cisco's PIX would do.
> I am using linux redhat
pls, i'd like to perform traffic shapping and bandwidth allocation on my
linux server.
I want to be able to do everything that a device like packeteer
floodgate's)and cisco's PIX would do.
I am using linux redhat v 6.2.
How do i go about this?
lara
_
11 matches
Mail list logo