On Mon, 2006-03-06 at 02:19 +0100, Andreas Klauer wrote:
> > The revised class structure is now:
> >
> > htb class parent 1: classid 1:10 rate 80% ceil 100%
> > htb class parent 1:10 classid 1:11 rate 100% ceil 100%
> > htb class parent 1:11 classid 1:19 rate 30% ceil 100% prio 0 [VOIP l
On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 10:53:13AM +1000, Russell Stuart wrote:
> I can verify it doesn't. I have implemented this in real
> life, and the class is limited to the "rate".
Thanks for pointing it out.
> The revised class structure is now:
>
> htb class parent 1: classid 1:10 rate 80% ceil 10
Andreas Klauer wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 02:33:17PM -0800, gypsy wrote:
> > Since I understand your ASCII art and comments, I would very much
> > appreciate it if you would draw what you see and criticize the
> > following. Hopefully I'll better understand after that!
>
> Uh, right. Don
On Sun, 2006-03-05 at 10:16 +0100, Andreas Klauer wrote:
> >
> > htb class parent 1: classid 1:10 rate 80% ceil 100%
>
> To my understanding, a root class that has a higher ceil than rate
> can always use bandwidth up to it's ceil. Thus it would be more
> correct to set the rate to 100% her
On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 02:33:17PM -0800, gypsy wrote:
> Since I understand your ASCII art and comments, I would very much
> appreciate it if you would draw what you see and criticize the
> following. Hopefully I'll better understand after that!
Uh, right. Don't take anything I say for granted, t
Andreas,
Since I understand your ASCII art and comments, I would very much
appreciate it if you would draw what you see and criticize the
following. Hopefully I'll better understand after that!
TIA,
gypsy
tc qdisc add dev imq0 root handle 1: htb default 20
tc class add dev imq0 parent 1: class
I wanted to post my new shaping rules which I am running on my IPCOP
router. They seem to be working very well so far. Any comments to my
setup would be appreciated.
#!/bin/bash
# clear out the chain and setup a new chain
iptables -t mangle -D OUTPUT -o eth1 -j BW-OUT 2> /dev/null > /dev/nul
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On netBSD setting the MTU also seems to set the MRU, is this the case
here to? should people have thier DSLAMs configured for the same MTU?
It doesn't set MRU - you can still receive a larger than MTU packet.
I guess what you mean is MSS, if so yes Linux and Windows
Can somebody give me an answer?
What about tcng project? is it dead?
Why a lot of users have to use non official IMQ patch,
are there any plans for make ingress qdisc usefull
as egress qdisc (without imq patch)?
Radek
___
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@ma
Em Qui 23 Fev 2006 20:41, Markus Schulz escreveu:
> you need a patch for NAT processing with multiple gateways. this will
> then save the routing information for each connection inside NAT
> structures, so that each packet of an established connection will be
> get routed over the same gateway. you
How can i do a tcng configuration with nested classes, could someone give me a example-- Juan Felipe Botero Ingeniería de sistemasUniversidad de Antioquia
___
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 01:43:11PM +1000, Russell Stuart wrote:
> HTB Class structure the implements this:
>
> htb class parent 1: classid 1:10 rate 80% ceil 100%
To my understanding, a root class that has a higher ceil than rate
can always use bandwidth up to it's ceil. Thus it would be mor
12 matches
Mail list logo
