gypsy wrote:
>
> > tc qdisc add dev eth0.2 root handle 1: htb
> > tc class add dev eth0.2 parent 1: classid 1:1 htb rate 1 ceil
> > 1 burst 100 quantum 1600
> > tc class add dev eth0.2 parent 1:1 classid 1:10 htb prio 1 rate
> > 7000 ceil 7000 burst 100 quantum 160
If you use filters, you can use src IP or TOS to send traffic from
different clients to different bands. There is no connection tracking in
qdisc, the priority mapping is done according to the TC_PRIO.
I think this will help
http://www.opalsoft.net/qos/DS-23.htm
-Original Message-
From: A
Thank you for the reply!
Is prio per flow based or per connection based.I mean if I have two
clients(two different systems)each sending different flows of traffic, it
seems to classify flows from one system but it does not aggregate the flows
of same priority of all clients.Is this observation corr
On 12/6/2007 11:40 AM, Shane McKinley wrote:
Wouldn't the redundant VRRP cause an IP address conflict?
No. Let me try to explain using pseudo IP addresses. For the sake of
discussion we will use the RFC test network of 192.0.2.0/24. (All IPs
below will be just the last octet in said subnet
Grant Taylor wrote:
This looks to be a general routing related question rather than a "Linux
Advanced Routing and Traffic Control" (a.k.a. LARTC) question and thus
may be better answered elsewhere.
*nod*
On 12/06/07 10:43, Shane McKinley wrote:
I am setting up 2 Vyatta routers that will serve
Hi , i am trying to understand how RED queue discipline works but i am
having a few troubles.
The parameters are MIN , MAX , LIMIT , BURST
I put LIMIT = 64Kb, so if i am not wrong it should PDROP anything over
this value , right ?
i put MIN = 8Kb , so no drops at all below this value, right ?
i
I do not know about TOS, but it can be mapped well with filters.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Archana Rajagopal
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 2:56 AM
To: lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl
Subject: [LARTC] prio qdisc not wokring
Hi,
I am work
Hi All,
I'm using HTB to shape traffic, a little like this:
tc qdisc add dev eth2 root handle 1:0 htb
tc qdisc add dev eth3 root handle 1:0 htb
tc filter add dev eth2 parent 1: protocol 0x8100 prio 5 u32 match u16
3000 0x0fff at 0 flowid 1:1 action ipt -j MARK --or-mark 0x0100
tc filter ad
I have a existencial problem.
There are some provider that offer the service of bandwith asimetric as
download/upload link as for example 512/256. but most of them offer not
exclusive this amount of transmission or reception capacity. They usually
offer the service with more users as a ratio of
In 2.4 kernels, there was a [bp]fifo that could be implemented with 'tc
add', but in 2.6 kernels, I find no way to create either of these
fifos. I am able to increase txqueuelen.
What I desire is a larger number of backlogged packetes before drops
occur.
How can the output buffer size be increas
> Koblensky Mingyur wrote:
>
> Hi all !
> i'm looking at the performance of the HTB algorithm/implementation
> because i would like more packets/sec !!
> this is the scenario of the performance test:
>
> i'm using an embedded system with:
> SPEED CPU: 399,999 MHz
> RAM: 128 MByte
> FLASH: 16 MByt
Hi,
I am working on linux 2.6.16.I tried to prioritize traffic using prio
module but its not working well.It always maps to same class irrespective of
ToS.Is it possible to fix it using filters?Anybody fixed this problem?
--
Regards
Archana Rajagopal
___
Hello,
I've set up a GRE tunnel between two Linux boxes and it's working well,
with or without IPSEC (under GRE). The problem is that when I have no
traffic for some minutes, side A cannot communicate to side B any more,
unless side B tries to communidate to side A. The same thing happens in
the o
This looks to be a general routing related question rather than a "Linux
Advanced Routing and Traffic Control" (a.k.a. LARTC) question and thus
may be better answered elsewhere.
On 12/06/07 10:43, Shane McKinley wrote:
I am setting up 2 Vyatta routers that will serve as redundant
failover core
I am setting up 2 Vyatta routers that will serve as redundant failover
core routers out to the backbone of our ISP. They will be serving for
routing between other branches and the ISP and bandwidth management.
I am trying to differentiate between the plethora of information about
having redundant,
Title: HTB performance improvement
Hi all !
i'm looking at the performance of the HTB algorithm/implementation because i would like more packets/sec !!
this is the scenario of the performance test:
i'm using an embedded system with:
SPEED CPU: 399,999 MHz
RAM: 128 MByte
FLASH: 16 MByte
EEPR
16 matches
Mail list logo