Ok, I'm pretty new to this stuff, so I hope this question doesn't appear stupid:
How do I connect an IMQ to different network interfaces?
eg...say I want to control OUTGOING traffic normally on 3 different interfaces:
tc qdisc add dev "eth0" root handle 1: htb default 1
tc class add dev "eth0" p
Hi,
Tell me if I understand this right.
For a packet that is not for local host,
but comes in on one interface and goes
out on another;
Will that packet traverse PREROTING, FORWARD and POSTROUTING
on _both_ underface, or
will that packet traverse PREROTING, FORWARD and POSTROUTING
only once, w
On Don, 27 Mär 2003, Matthias Weingart wrote:
>Maybe another way is better. What is the most common of P2P traffic? It
>makes much much traffic.
Not really. Well, it depends on your users, if all they do is surfing, you
are right, but not if they are mirroring www.kernel.org.
A better criteria fo
Bryan,
: Thanks for the help Martin. I was under the impression that DNAT
: altered the packets on the PREROUTING chain going both ways.
Yes, connection tracking is a tricky little beast to understand
: :What did you pour all over the documentation on the Internet? ;)
: : Did it get in
Thanks for the help Martin. I was under the impression that DNAT
altered the packets on the PREROUTING chain going both ways.
:What did you pour all over the documentation on the Internet? ;)
Did it
:get in your pores?
I actually studied it so intently that I was sweating. :)
:And one o
Maybe another way is better. What is the most common of P2P traffic? It
makes much much traffic. So let us catch it there. Monitor the traffic of
one IP and if the traffic within a certain time is high, the bandwidth of
this IP is set down to a lower level automatically (or put in lower priority
qu
David,
Sorry, wrong list! Please try the FreeS/WAN list.
http://www.freeswan.org/freeswan_trees/freeswan-1.5/doc/mail.html
-Martin
: I am trying to connect road-warriors (running on WinXP) to my home network
: via FreeS/WAN but it does not work.
: I am using version 1.99 with "plutodebug
On Thursday 27 March 2003 19:18, Victor Cassar wrote:
> Hi:
>
> I wonder about which part of the kptd iptraf
> "intercepts or hear from"
As info, I think he means the "Kernel Packet Traveling Diagram"
http://www.docum.org/stef.coene/qos/kptd/
Stef
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Using Linux as bandwidth
Hi,
I am trying to connect road-warriors (running on WinXP) to my home network
via FreeS/WAN but it does not work.
I am using version 1.99 with "plutodebug=all" set in the config but it does
not give any output when I try to connect.
The client is behind a router in network 192.168.20.0/24, the s
Title: Message
Hi, Bert, Hi All
I finished the
reading of you Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control HOWTO...
Congratulations for the excelent job ! You HOWTO helped me to implement my
firewall and NAT/Routing.
Could you please
help me in a little doubt that I can't figure ?
I hav
one thing im not sure for performance of wondershape script (htb) is:
you have three classes, each with a bit less available BW, and difrrent
prios...but for example:
you can have kazaa online, trafic would go to bulk class at the maximun
speed (0.9*$UPLINK) .. packets will go fast, and will back
Hello everybody !!
Personally I have a 512 kb/s line @ the office. Bandwidth really costs a
lot so that's what I do. I give a maximum of 15 kb/s to each one of my
clients. And that's all. If they wish more in order to download smth
needed, then they have either to mail me or call me to change their
Hi:
I wonder about which part of the kptd iptraf
"intercepts or hear from"
any info?
thanks in advance
Victor
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
http://platinum.yahoo.com
___
Hi,
That's normal.
Every packet that you send, has a tcp-header. So you can only send
92Mbit of data. If you used udp, you would get a throughput around
94Mbit.
Best,
Wouter
-Original Message-
From: Cheng Kwok Wing, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: donderdag 27 maart 2003 18:2
Hi,
I've got a 100Mbit NIC and used iperf and netperf to
test them. The measured throughput is around 92Mbit.
My question is what causes the degrade in
performance??
Overhead in packets?? CPU clock speed(My desktop uses
P3-500MHz)??
Best,
William
On Thursday 27 March 2003 17:44, Remus wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I get these shrill messages inmy /var/log/messages and on terminal 1
>
> Mar 27 16:37:31 webgate kernel: HTB init, kernel part version 3.7
> Mar 27 16:37:31 webgate kernel: HTB: quantum of class 10022 is small.
> Consider r2q change.<6>H
Ooops...forwarding a copy of my reply to the list...
-Martin
- - - - - - -
Hello Anton,
: Is there any problems when Policy and SNAT.
: It is not working as i wonna.
Well, it depends a great deal on how you use policy routing and SNAT.
Generally, I have had fabulous luck with it. Another per
Is there any problems when Policy and SNAT.
It is not working as i wonna.
My main table has Default gateway
I has second table, with different default gateway
Packet, that comes from my internal network is routed via man table.
In POSTROUTING i SNAT it befind IP, that must be routed via second ta
On Thursday 27 Mar 2003 16:38, Robert Kryczało wrote:
> > The problem you start getting there is that monitoring and
> > shaping traffic on
> > a 100 Mb pipe will take a huge amount of CPU power, and even that
> > will only
> > work if the traffic is not encrypted. The only way of attacking
> > th
Hi folks,
I get these shrill messages inmy /var/log/messages and on terminal 1
Mar 27 16:37:31 webgate kernel: HTB init, kernel part version 3.7
Mar 27 16:37:31 webgate kernel: HTB: quantum of class 10022 is small.
Consider r2q change.<6>HTB init, kernel part version 3.7
Mar 27 16:37:32 webgate k
Hi,
> > > That sounds like an interesting idea, provided you have some real
> > > evidence of
> > > this being the case. And this will only work until P2P
> network software
> > > starts to randomly change packet sizes to obfuscate itself. :-(
> >
> > I was told that applications doing it exists. I
On Thursday 27 Mar 2003 15:32, Robert Kryczało wrote:
> > Unfortunately, it gets progressively more difficult when P2P
> > clients learn to
> > masquerade as the real protocols, and there is at least one P2P
> > application
> > out there that can operate over SMTP, sending valid requests. :-(
>
>
Hi:
I would like to know how can i bridge traffic between
2 lans over the internet, if posible i prefer to do
this using kernel features instead of userspace app
of course encryption is desirable but not a most since
i can set iptables rules to limit traffic
thanks in advance for any comment or
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Gordan Bobic
> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 11:17 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [LARTC] Intelligent P2P detection
>
> Unfortunately, it gets progressively more difficult when P2P
> clien
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Dawid Kuroczko
> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 10:37 PM
> To: Luman
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [LARTC] Intelligent P2P detection
>
>
> On Tue, 25 Mar 2003, Luman wrote:
>
> > I need this
On Thu, 27 Mar 2003 20:20:09 +0800
"Liu Zhiyong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> How to use red qdisc? can anyone give me an example?
$TC qdisc add dev $DEVB parent 1:10 red min 1600 max 3210 burst 2 limit 32100 avpkt
1000
min = (delay)*bandwidt(bits/s), burst= (2*min+max)/(3*avpkt)), lim
How to use red qdisc? can anyone give me an example?
___
LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
How to use red qdisc? can anyone give me an example?
___
LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
Hi all,
I have a network configuration where a router must forward traffic to
the same destination (that is, all the packets have the same destination
IP address) through different output iterfaces.
Each flow has a weight and flows of different weight must be routed
through a different interfa
On Thursday 27 Mar 2003 09:24, Luman wrote:
> >Assumptions:
> > Determine and mark 'good traffic' -- i.e. smtp, ftp, http, ssh, etc.,
> > everything which uses well known ports. Probably most people do it
> > anyway, at least to some level.
>
> The problem is with that currently P2P soft often
>-Original Message-
>From: Dawid Kuroczko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 10:50 PM
>To: Robert Kryczało
>Cc: Luman; 'Kim Jensen'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: [LARTC] Intelligent P2P detection
>
[...]
>
>A suggestion. Something which works as more advanced
>Assumptions:
> Determine and mark 'good traffic' -- i.e. smtp, ftp, http, ssh, etc.,
> everything which uses well known ports. Probably most people do it
> anyway, at least to some level.
The problem is with that currently P2P soft often use these well known
ports too. So the assumption that
32 matches
Mail list logo
