Hello!
Scenario: kernel 2.6.22.9, SysKonnect SK-9E21D, vlan, redirecting for
packets arriving on than vlan to ifb.
Using tcpdump on ifb iinterface I see the following:
03:30:17.322484 5a:71:6f:15:00:17 > 00:00:5a:71:00:00, ethertype Unknown
(0xcb69), length 1522:
0x: 2000 0800 45
Se'bastien CRAMATTE написа:
Hello,
Where can I found ESFQ patch for a 2.6.18 kernel...
http://fatooh.org/*esfq*-2.6/
seems to be down
___
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
http:
Nataniel Klug wrote:
Andreas,
This is not the problem becouse if I disable the rules I am using, and
use other script just with rules using fwmark them the other script
works fine.
Att,
Nataniel Klug
Andreas Klauer escreveu:
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 03:26:00PM -0300, Nataniel Klug wrote:
Kenneth Kalmer wrote:
Guys
Given the replies and interests lately on the WRR scheduler, and the
shameless promotion of Route Hat (only kidding), my question is
simple. Is there an alternative for the 2.6.x kernels?
From what I gather WRR is only available for the 2.4 kernels...
Regards
Peter Kaagman wrote:
Hi list...
I work for a school in the netherlands with a 2mbit Internet uplink and
about 3800 eager student who want to play games on the Internet using
one of our 800 workstations.
Problem was that those game playing students are concentrated in 2 of
our 6 physical locati
ThE LinuX_KiD wrote:
Hi,
I've used old ZPH patch under squid 2.4 Stable4
and it works great !
Now I want to patch squid 2.4 stable 5,
with new patch, on http://www.it-academy.bg/zph/
I've patched and installed squid 2.5 stable 5
succefully, but I can't get ZPH works.
I'm trying with
...
$TC cl
Short: you need zph patch.
Detailed: you could use both, if you need. They just do different jobs.
With the first patch you could control outgoing connections, i.e.
communication between squid and web servers/peers. With the second patch
(zph), you could control communication between squid and cl
Maybe my question is not very clear, I'll try to explain again.
I use imq+htb+wrr+esfq, but it has nothing to do with the problem.
The limit is the physical line, a PC behind wireless clients can't use
more than 4 mbit due to physical restriction, it just can't use the
other wireless channel. The s
Is it not fully implemented, or I'm wrong somewhere?
I'm trying to make a filter based on the MAC address, but have no success.
Using iptables with the mac extension works, but only for the IP. But I want
to filter other protocols (0x8863 and 0x8864 - PPPOE). So I can't use
iptables.
I tried arpt
Stef Coene wrote:
> > Stef,
> >
> > We have about 3200 iptables rules on our bridge. I've tested today to
> > remove 1000 of these rules. The load dropped from about 40% to 25%. So I
> > think the iptables rule take up the most of the CPU load. Do you think this
> > is a problem of ineffeciency of
Hi!
Is there some hard (internal) speed limit for htb or imq?
The reason for this question is the following strange behavior:
Limiting the bandwidth at speeds up to about 730kbps works correct.
But increasing the limit has no effect, the speed remains at about
730kbps.
The ceil is bigger then rat
Rohan Almeida wrote:
> HI,
> I've got a proxy arp setup with iptables and tc.
>
> on eth0 i have a route to 172.16.2.0/24 network
> on eth1 is the LAN of 172.16.1.0/24 network
>
> I have enabled proxy arp on both interfaces.
> Now accordingly, the interface will respond
> to all ARP requests for w
12 matches
Mail list logo
