On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, Michael T. Babcock wrote:
Arthur van Leeuwen wrote:
Unfortunately, in systems with identical cards that are configured using
plug-and-play methods such as those used by PCI random is the best shot you
have...
'Deterministic' is more accurate. It seems to be
On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, [iso-8859-1] John Bäckstrand wrote:
[snip]
2) I would _want_ to traffic shape based on mac, not
IP, but this doesnt seem possible. It isnt vital for me
though, ip will work.
Actually, it is possible, using netfilter and fwmarks.
Netfilter can actually match based on MAC
Since some other constraints require me to still run 2.2 kernel.
(drivers for some hardware not working under 2.4)
I tried to control the ingress traffic with the ingress qdisc with no
success whatsoever.
I got 2.2.21 kernel and installed the ds8 patch to have the ingress
qdisc too.
Michael T. Babcock wrote:
bert hubert wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 12:02:40PM +0800, Patrick Chan wrote:
There is priority queueing in Cisco router.
Please dig up a link so we can see what 'priority queueing' actually
*is*.
But I bet that tc has it.
I can almost guarantee
Adam B. Fineberg wrote:
Can this be done in 2.4.18 by changing HZ in include/asm-i386/param.h to
1000?
Yes.
Would anything else need to be changed, like CLOCKS_PER_SEC (also
in param.h)?
Hmm, CLOCKS_PER_SEC doesn't look right, particularly if you look at
it is the same as PRIO queue in linux tc.
devik
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, bert hubert wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 12:02:40PM +0800, Patrick Chan wrote:
There is priority queueing in Cisco router.
Is there any equivalent implementation for TC on Linux?
If yes, how can I configure and can
sfq MUST be leaf because it is classless.
devik
On Mon, 8 Jul 2002, Joshua Snyder wrote:
I have read most of the documents regarding both Htb and Sfq and I
still am not sure if it is best to put the Sfq on the leaf Htb or to put
it closer to the root class. All of the docs for Htb say to
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 11:07:20AM +0300, Alexander Trotsai wrote:
[root@watcher root]# tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1:
htb default 20
Make doubly sure that you are running a patched tc. Verify which tc you are
running - perhaps an old one is lying around.
ps. Could I use htb queuening
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 04:35:16AM +0400, Poltorak Serguei wrote:
Hello.
I would like to route broadcast messages.
For now, if I ping a.b.c.255 from m.n.o.w the packet is passing through
each router, except the last, a.b.c.1 (m.n.o.p, other external address)
and only he replys to that
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 02:14:05PM -0700, John Telford wrote:
I'm building routers. It's difficult to tell in advance which NIC will
be assigned eth0 and which will assigned eth1 when using two NICs. Ping
testing usually clears up this simple problem.
The identification problem gets worse
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 10:29:43AM +0200, bert hubert wrote:
bhOn Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 11:07:20AM +0300, Alexander Trotsai wrote:
bh [root@watcher root]# tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1:
bh htb default 20
bhMake doubly sure that you are running a patched tc. Verify which tc you are
Title: Re: [LARTC] Priority Queueing on Linux
Hi,
Below is the explanation of priority queueing
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/cisintwk/ito_doc/qos.htm#xtocid22
I am developing a linux router.
There is both data and voice traffic passed thru it.
When I use priority queueing on
Title: QoS on data and voice traffic
Hi,
Sorry for asking so much questions in this mailing list.
Because I have to develop a Linux router,
there are both data and voice packets passed thru it.
The voice packets are already tagged with 0x8 in TOS field.
The bandwidth of the serial link is
Hello
but packets are going To their subnetwork. then m.n.o.w sends packet to
a.b.c.255 gateways other than a.b.c.1 doesn't know that a.b.c.255 is a
broadcast. it's only a.b.c.1 (m.n.o.p) who discards the packet
may be I should redraw my pic.
a.b.c.0/24,brd+ -[ a.b.c.1, m.n.o.p
Hi,
You are wrong! The packets must spend less time in
your box for 0x08 class. So, if you are using cbq and
sfq I don't belive that you will have good results.
First you need a scheduler between 0x08 class and 0x00
like PRIO. You can use sfq for 0x00 class or tbf to
limit the bandwidth. For
Anton Yurchenko wrote:
nope, here it is.
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_c/qcprt2/qcdconmg.htm#23965
From the page (for those who don't follow links, or for the archives of
this list):
PQ [Priority Queuing] allows you to define how traffic is
Is this possible with linux TC ? My problem is I dont
know each and every IP-address that will be used.
Just wanted to let everyone know that I think I found
my solution:
http://wipl-wrr.sourceforge.net
It automatically creates a classes based on either IP
or MAC.
---
John Bäckstrand
Hello All,
What your are trying to do is called directed broadcast, and the linux
networking gods believe it is evil (i.e. a security hole) and should not
be implemented by routers. See
http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/net/9707.3/0030.html for example.
Eran.
Poltorak
Thus spake bert hubert:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 02:14:05PM -0700, John Telford wrote:
I'm building routers. It's difficult to tell in advance which NIC will
be assigned eth0 and which will assigned eth1 when using two NICs. Ping
testing usually clears up this simple problem.
The
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 04:38:55PM +0400, Vladimir B. Savkin wrote:
A script to rename interfaces with ip link ... set name ... after
modprobe according to their hw addresses should suffice.
I never tried this because in my experience order of detection was always
consistant between
1) I want to deploy a box in bridge mode first of
all.
2) I would _want_ to traffic shape based on mac,
not
IP, but this doesnt seem possible. It isnt vital
for me
though, ip will work.
3) I want each ip (well, preferrably MAC, but...)
to
have 3 mbit of bandwidth.
On one level
HZ is set to 100 in that patch.. :
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of Dmitriy
Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 1:30 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LARTC] HZ to be 1000 - 2.5.25 may have this
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 06:17:10PM -0700,
Forgive me if this is something so simple that i
should already know it, but i need to understand
if i can accomplish this with Linux routing.
We have a /26 subnet from our ISP, and we have
been using a Linux box as a firewall to put all
our workstations behind NAT, with port forwarding
for
CIT/Paul wrote:
HZ is set to 100 in that patch.. :
Try to download this url:
http://www.ibiblio.org/gentoo/distfiles/linux-gentoo-2.4.19-crypto-r7.pa
tch.bz2
Acutally in this patch the clock rate becomes configurable. HZ is set to
CONFIG_JIFFIES which defaults to
From: CIT/Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Any help would be greatly appreciated :) This is much better than SFQ :
Sounds like SFQ to me. Can you tell us what the differences are?
___
LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Try:
eth0 (external) - x.y.z.193/27
eth1 (internal) - x.y.z.225/27 (non-nat)
eth2 (internal) - 192.168.0.0/24 (nat)
eth0 - turn on proxy_arp
eth1 - turn on proxy_arp
eth2 - leave proxy_arp off.
This should work just fine.
Connections for the eth1-connected addresses will 'forward' through
Don Cohen wrote:
From: CIT/Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Any help would be greatly appreciated :) This is much better than SFQ :
Sounds like SFQ to me. Can you tell us what the differences are?
PRIO'd SFQ.
If you had classful PRIO with SFQ on each band, you'd probably have a
similar effect
Paul writes:
No SFQ is not like WFQ... WRR is the closest thing to cisco's
fair-queue..
WRR keeps track of the connections using the ip_conntrack .. that's sort of
what
cisco's fair-queue does and it checks the bandwidth streams and gives lower
priority
to the higher streams and
This is not very convincing. Do you actually know
how WFQ
works? If so, please tell us. The doc you sent did
not describe how
it works but what the effects are, and those are
entirely consistent
with what SFQ does.
High bandwidth flows are limited, low bandwidth flows
get lower
latency.
=?iso-8859-1?Q?John_B=E4ckstrand?= writes:
This is not very convincing. Do you actually
know
how WFQ
works? If so, please tell us. The doc you sent
did
not describe how
it works but what the effects are, and those are
entirely consistent
with what SFQ does.
High
Btw, about the original question (havent got the
original email left), there is a WFQ implementation for
ALTQ and FreeBSD, but it seems to not work too well:
http://www.criticalsoftware.com/research/pdf/Paper-PS.p
df
http://corn.eos.nasa.gov/qos/qos_results_summary_july98
.html
---
John
Hi Patrick
I have implement voice and data on a linux machine with the assistance of
tc. I have found limited success with tc to this end.
I am using an ADSL link of 1.5Mb/256Kb. I previously had a 64Kb ISDN link
which I could not really get top quality out of with data and voice. (So I
just
Title: Message
You
can use the prio options in qdisc and channel traffic thro' different qdiscs.
Another option is to set TOS marks and route to qdiscs using the mark filters in
u32 classifier.
Why
don't you look up http://www.docum.net . Staf
has a good site going. I've benefitted from
May be you use ftp in passive mode, where port 20 not used
10.07.2002 11:57:48, Andrei Boros [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since some other constraints require me to still run 2.2 kernel.
(drivers for some hardware not working under 2.4)
I tried to control the ingress traffic with the ingress
Bert thanks for your reply
It seems routing daemons are not creating problem.
with:
ifconfig eth1 up
I find that I am able to make interface up again, but
it disappears after a while if I do not do anything on
this machine for a while and comes back again with
ifconfig eth1 up
I have another
35 matches
Mail list logo
