On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 12:16:20 -0400,
seph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Can I do this with tc, or is the entire interface shaped? It seems
> like I might be able to create a more explicate filter, but I'm having
> trouble getting it to work.
You can filter on the destination ip address.
___
I have a pretty simple setup. I've got a linux nat box, with some
internal hosts. I've also got some servers in a dmz. It looks
something like this:
Internet
|
(external network)
| |
| |
Gianluca \"acid_burn\" D'Andrea wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi all!
>
> when I activate wondershaper on my dsl connection (pppoa vc mux), i get
> three errors:
>
> # sh -x /usr/sbin/wshaper ppp0
> + /usr/sbin/xmlstarter setenv tc_downlink
> + DOWNLINK=
> + /u
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi all!
when I activate wondershaper on my dsl connection (pppoa vc mux), i get
three errors:
# sh -x /usr/sbin/wshaper ppp0
+ /usr/sbin/xmlstarter setenv tc_downlink
+ DOWNLINK=
+ /usr/sbin/xmlstarter setenv tc_uplink
+ UPLINK=
+ [ -z ]
+ cat /pro
Keith Mitchell wrote:
Did anyone ever answer this one? THIS is what I am trying to do:
[LARTC] cbq+sfq and DSCP marking
I haven't used dscp but it looks like you need to add cbq below dsmark
and then filter with tcindex see
http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.adv-qdisc.dsmark.html
Andy.
__
Did anyone ever answer this one? THIS is what I am trying to do:
>[LARTC] cbq+sfq and DSCP marking
>Maria Joana Urbano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Thu, 13 Feb 2003 19:29:42 +
>
>* Previous message: [LARTC] Monitoring
>* Next message: [LARTC] two routes 1 network card
>* Messages sorted
Hi,
I am doing LARTC style policy based routing to allocate traffic between
two different T-1 based ISPs via a single egress NIC card (two different
default routes depending on source address). I would like to try out
Wondershaper on this NIC. I have initially set:
DOWNLINK=2500
UPLINK=2500
DEV
Title: RE: [LARTC] wondershaper
Well, the way I see it, if you are trying to load balance over two T1 lines in your own network, using multipath routing or something similar is not an issue. However, when you are trying to load balance over two T1 lines provided by seperate ISPs, you
Hi,
I am new to the Linux Advance Routing Project and to Policy Based
Routing as implemented in Linux but I have been using Linux for 10
years so not _really_ a newbie Looking at the lartc.org website I came
across the reference implementation of a traffic shaper...
I also have Matt M
On Thu, 2005-07-28 at 15:00 -0400, Payal Rathod wrote:
> Hello,
> I am trying wondershaper-1.1a on a friend's pppoe connection on her
> Linux box.
> There are a few things I don't understand.
> 1. She has pppoe connection so should DEV=eth0 or DEV=ppp0 ?
Frankly I can't remember. My home box is n
Hello,
I am trying wondershaper-1.1a on a friend's pppoe connection on her
Linux box.
There are a few things I don't understand.
1. She has pppoe connection so should DEV=eth0 or DEV=ppp0 ?
2. Her ISP just says on her payment bill that the speed is 128kbps, but
doesn't mention any downlink/uplink
On Monday 09 May 2005 10:29, Anthony Letchet wrote:
> Im still reading the howtos on how to write my own rules but since the
> wondershaper script is doing exactly what i want i had hoped that
> someone would know the commands to implement this now :)
I did such a modification to wondershaper once
Well as near as I can tell you have at least a few options.
1) You could take a look at the shaping how to that I think is somewhere
linked off the gentoo.org documentation. That way you could
create/modify a script that would handle it.
2) Change your topology so all your equipment is connected
Hi all, ive got wondershaper working well with the highest download
while maintaing minimal latency but the problem is this:
ive got 2 nics in the linux router eth0 and eth1. eth1= internet
interface but this is connected to a router say 10.0.0.190, now off that
router there are other servers, mai
I have been testing wondershaper 1.1a with htb.
DOWNLINK=2304
UPLINK=1024
DEV=wlan0
No other changes have been made, except to comment out the 2 lines to
allow the script to run.
When I do a speed test from sites like www.toast.net/performance, I only
get speeds equal to my UPLINK speed. I expe
mornin' all,
i still haven't found the right solution for my situation, but after
some digging, i realized that the free PuTTY SSH client (commonly used
to access remote systems from under Windows) does NOT set the TOS bit
in a way that would let the default wondershaper script identify its
p
Hi,
having read the docs and the wondershaper script itself, it occurred to
me that the documentation promises an immediate drop in interactive app
latency, specifically mentioning SSH as a big winner.
however, looking through the script i can't really tell just *how*
wondershaper figures out w
greetings all,
i've searched high and low for this, but can't seem to find an answer
anywhere..
having read the docs and the wondershaper script itself, it occurred to
me that the documentation promises an immediate drop in interactive app
latency, specifically mentioning SSH as a big winne
Johan Lindqvist wrote:
> This is my setup:
> DSL modem > 4 port internet router > 1. Winxp computer
>> 2. Linux computer
>> 3. Linux computer (thin client to computer no 2)
>
> Every computer has one NIC. I know that the inte
nix4me wrote:
>
> gypsy wrote:
> >You might be able to set up a modified Wonder such that the default /
> >bulk does 100Mbit (assuming your internal NW is 100) by setting RATE =
> >CEIL = 100Mb and then shape everything where the IP matches your DSL IP
> >so that internet stuff never gets into the
gypsy wrote:
Johan Lindqvist wrote:
I've gotten wondershaper to work in my linux box, which is part of a 3
computer network that shares the same dsl connection. The linuxbox
handles most bulk down and uploading, and the other 2 are mainly for
surfing and such.
What I need from wiondershaper is t
gypsy wrote:
Johan Lindqvist wrote:
I've gotten wondershaper to work in my linux box, which is part of a 3
computer network that shares the same dsl connection. The linuxbox
handles most bulk down and uploading, and the other 2 are mainly for
surfing and such.
What I need from wiondershaper is t
Johan Lindqvist wrote:
>
> I've gotten wondershaper to work in my linux box, which is part of a 3
> computer network that shares the same dsl connection. The linuxbox
> handles most bulk down and uploading, and the other 2 are mainly for
> surfing and such.
> What I need from wiondershaper is tha
I've gotten wondershaper to work in my linux box, which is part of a 3
computer network that shares the same dsl connection. The linuxbox
handles most bulk down and uploading, and the other 2 are mainly for
surfing and such.
What I need from wiondershaper is that it should perform it's tasks
wi
! :)
Fernando Favero
- Original Message -
From:
Sebastian A. Aresca
To: Fernando Favero
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 1:45
AM
Subject: Re: [LARTC] wondershaper under
Debian
Fernando: mira la verdad ni idea de lo que puede
llegar a ser. Yo estoy usando un debian
Hi everybody! I know this discussion list isn´t
just about wondershaper, but i think someone can help me.
I used to have a linux box running red hat 8, as
firewall on my lan. I upgraded to debian 3.0 and tried to use the same
wondershaper files under debian, but, when i run wondershaper on pp
Matthias Lendholt wrote:
Those are port lists, not the line speed. They should be more like
NOPRIOPORTDST="53 21 22"
or similar. Check the docs for more help on it.
Hi,
I have a question conercing wondershaper. I'm using the Clarkconnect linux
distribution for my linux router and I tried to use won
Hi,
I have a question conercing wondershaper. I'm using the Clarkconnect linux
distribution for my linux router and I tried to use wondershaper.
On start up of wshaper, there are no errors or any other problems but I'm
not sure if it's running correctly. Only one qdisc / one class is used and
when
Richard wrote:
I have wondershaper to limit my upload at 400kilobits (my line is 600kbps).
I do a lot of torrent seeding and I dont want my pings killed when I'm
uploading so I set low prority source ports as follows (by the way, I have
bittornet to only use ports 6881-6910):
That means BT will l
I have wondershaper to limit my upload at 400kilobits (my line is 600kbps).
I do a lot of torrent seeding and I dont want my pings killed when I'm
uploading so I set low prority source ports as follows (by the way, I have
bittornet to only use ports 6881-6910):
NOPRIOPORTSRC="6881 6882 6883 688
I added, changing eth0 to the dev variable. I'll have to find out when i
get home if it's going to work right for local stuff. Thanks for your
help.
-Marc
Simon Oosthoek wrote:
Marc Reichman wrote:
I have no real interest in doing anything with specific remote hosts,
I just want to bypass t
Marc Reichman wrote:
I have no real interest in doing anything with specific remote hosts,
I just want to bypass the limiting for the certain IP range. I imagine
I'd do this by adding something referencing 192.168.0.0/24 to an
existing line in the script? Have an idea of which?
tc filter add d
I have no real interest in doing anything with specific remote hosts, I
just want to bypass the limiting for the certain IP range. I imagine I'd
do this by adding something referencing 192.168.0.0/24 to an existing
line in the script? Have an idea of which?
-Marc
Simon Oosthoek wrote:
Marc Re
Marc Reichman wrote:
Hi,
I really like the wondershaper script, it works very well for me. My
question is this. Is there a way to get certain remote hosts to be
excluded from the shaping? I ask because I don't have my box connected
directly through the net. It sits behind a nat device, and has po
Marc Reichman wrote:
I will research in the howto, but I must say a lot of the terminology
goes over my head.
To summarize, my steps are:
1. create a queue with no bw limitations
2. create a filter for the 192.168.0.0/24 and point it at that queue.
Correct?
yes, however, now I think about it som
I will research in the howto, but I must say a lot of the terminology
goes over my head.
To summarize, my steps are:
1. create a queue with no bw limitations
2. create a filter for the 192.168.0.0/24 and point it at that queue.
Correct?
-Marc
Simon Oosthoek wrote:
Marc Reichman wrote:
Hi,
I
Hi,
I really like the wondershaper script, it works very well for me. My
question is this. Is there a way to get certain remote hosts to be
excluded from the shaping? I ask because I don't have my box connected
directly through the net. It sits behind a nat device, and has ports
forwarded in for s
gypsy wrote:
> Also
> remember YOU DO NOT SHAPE DOWNLOADS! HTB can only "police" D/L, not
> "shape". You must use iptables or IMQ to "shape" D/L; I use iptables -m
> limit --limit ##/second -j ACCEPT
> iptables -j DROP
> and make sure that these 2 lines preceed any RELATED, ESTABLISHED
> acce
gypsy wrote:
AFTERTHOUGHT: I should have been more precise:
> Yes, but be careful with NAT; finding 192.168.1.# can be tough. Also
> remember YOU DO NOT SHAPE DOWNLOADS! HTB can only "police" D/L, not
> "shape". You must use iptables or IMQ to "shape" D/L; I use iptables -m
> limit --limit ##
> Chris Winfield-Blum wrote:
>
> Hi I am very unclear about the wonder shaper and a bit of a novice
> with Unix all together
>
> I have a question for you and I hope you can answer
>
> Basically my office is getting a couple of people slowing down the
> network so ive been looking around and fou
Chris Winfield-Blum wrote:
> Maybe there is another solution to this problem?
>
> The problem is that I have had a couple of users on the network hogging
> the bandwidth and while we do have a policy implemented sometimes the
> downloads are genuinely work related (eg downloaded a new version of a
Maybe there is another solution to this problem?
The problem is that I have had a couple of users on the network hogging
the bandwidth and while we do have a policy implemented sometimes the
downloads are genuinely work related (eg downloaded a new version of an
application we use for development)
On Thursday 01 April 2004 21:03, Chris Winfield-Blum wrote:
> Hi I am very unclear about the wonder shaper and a bit of a novice
> with Unix all together
>
> I have a question for you and I hope you can answer
>
> Basically my office is getting a couple of people slowing down the
I would seriously
Hi I
am very unclear about the wonder shaper and a bit of a novice
with
Unix all together
I
have a question for you and I hope you can answer
Basically
my office is getting a couple of people slowing down the
network
so ive been looking around and found wondershaper
What
I
Hi Jason,
But isn't that where it would be if I did nothing to it? Only the
really bad traffic gets put in 1:30, right? BTW, the middle class is
1:20, correct?
Yeah, it is. I can't recall exactly why I did that, but it doesn't seem to make
sense now.
Oh, yes I can. I have other filters setup f
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Damion de Soto wrote:
| Hi Jason,
|
|> Am I silently being told that this is the wrong question to ask of this
|> list? :)
|
|
| Probably. I'll reply but I think it'll only be of statistic interest.
First of all, thanks for replying.
|> | I now have
Hi Jason,
Am I silently being told that this is the wrong question to ask of this
list? :)
Probably. I'll reply but I think it'll only be of statistic interest.
| I now have a situation where I get to use traffic shaping for a client.
| ~ We implemented the WonderShaper script on our own firew
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am I silently being told that this is the wrong question to ask of this
list? :)
Jason A. Pattie wrote:
| Hello, been awhile since I've written.
|
| I now have a situation where I get to use traffic shaping for a client.
| ~ We implemented the WonderSh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello, been awhile since I've written.
I now have a situation where I get to use traffic shaping for a client.
~ We implemented the WonderShaper script on our own firewall and
experienced no problems. I made some modifications to it to add IPSec
proto
This is still not working correctly. Wondershaper + htb by itself
limits everything to the speed specified in the config.
I only want to limit my ftp upload speed.
I tried the suggestion below, but either I am not doing it right or it
doesnt work correctly.
I only want to limit ports 5-6
mark ryan wrote:
> If i use the following tc command, where do i set the speed limit for
> the outbound ftp traffic?
>
> Mark
>
> On Sun, 2004-02-08 at 02:35, Corey Hickey wrote:
>
>>mark ryan wrote:
>>
>>>Is there a way to apply wondershaper w/ htb to a port range?
>>>
>>>I have a ftp server o
Is there a way to apply wondershaper w/ htb to a port range?
I have a ftp server on port 65432 and passive ports 5-6.
Is there a way to set a range? or do they have to be individually
listed?
The following doesnt seem to work:
# low priority source ports
NOPRIOPORTSRC=65432, 5:
Mark,
I am using wondershaper with htb to shape my network. I want to limit only
outbound ftp traffic (me uploading) from 192.168.1.101.
I am using port 21 for ftp with passive ports 50,000-60,000.
That's a large range of ports to shape, and other programs might be using them
- that's a problem wi
I am using wondershaper with htb to shape my network. I want to limit only
outbound ftp traffic (me uploading) from 192.168.1.101.
I am using port 21 for ftp with passive ports 50,000-60,000.
What else do I need to put in the config to do this? Here is my config.
DOWNLINK=3000
UPLINK=340
DEV=e
Hi Mark,
I have wondershaper running on my firewall/router. It has 2 ethernet cards
(eth0 and eth1). Eth1 connects to a cablemodem (2mbit down, 384kbit up) and
eth0 connects to a switch. I run a ftp server on a machine connected to the
swicth.
I want to be able to keep my ftp server from affecti
I got wshaper.htb working.however I have 1 question.
How can i limit just ftp server traffic?
I have ftp server on port 21 with passive ports of 5-6.
I currently have wondershaper with htb working on my routerbut im afraid
that it is also affecting all of my send trafficnot j
Hi,
I have wondershaper running on my firewall/router. It has 2 ethernet cards
(eth0 and eth1). Eth1 connects to a cablemodem (2mbit down, 384kbit up) and
eth0 connects to a switch. I run a ftp server on a machine connected to the
swicth.
I want to be able to keep my ftp server from affecting m
Hi,
I just installed wondershapper 1.1a on my ipcop firewall box. I have
roadrunner cable with a ftp server setup. My download speed is 2mbit (I get
225 KBytes) and my upload is 384kbit (I send at 43 KBytes).
What should the settings in wshaper?
I can ping yahoo.com at 90msec with little traff
Hi!
I'm testing out the wshaper script using both CBQ and HTB, with:
DOWNLINK=1152
UPLINK=312
DEV=eth3
It works great for simultaneous uploads/downloads, and FTP traffic,
but when I enable wshaper and am doing an NNTP download, it slows NNTP
downloads to 50kB/s. When I do a 'wshaper st
On Thursday 09 October 2003 10:42, Thomas Kirk wrote:
> Hep Dear Listmembers and Stef!
>
> Setup
>
> Internet
> eth0
>
>
> -
>
> eth1 eth2 eth3 eth4 <--- Lan .10/24 .11/24 etc
>
>
> All Lans are natted to eth0
>
> Now i use wondershaper (1.1a) on eth0 to shap interact
Hep Dear Listmembers and Stef!
Setup
Internet
eth0
|
|
-
||||
eth1 eth2 eth3 eth4 <--- Lan .10/24 .11/24 etc
All Lans are natted to eth0
Now i use wondershaper (1.1a) on eth0 to shap interactive traffic
(work allready thanks!) Bu
Hi Everybody,
Tomorrow the 5th of September I'll be presenting my new QoS gui which will
eventually include the wondershaper 2.0 as its configuration. Configuration
will also be loadable using a non-X tool, and the gui will be able to
configure remote machines as well using netlink-over-tcp.
If y
On Thursday 24 July 2003 14:54, Wizzcat wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I've just tried out this program and it works amazingly, throttling uploads
> at whatever speed I like it to. It works great for what I want it for,
> throttling emule which has a tendency to hose the entire network and
> grinding everything
Wizzcat wrote:
--snip---
wondering if there is a way to limit uploads speeds on only certain
ports so I could limit only p2p programs from going overboard and let
the rest of the computer continue uploading at full bandwith.
it should be fairly simple
the emule ports are listed here:
http://www.e
Hi!
I've just tried out this program and it works amazingly, throttling uploads
at whatever speed I like it to. It works great for what I want it for,
throttling emule which has a tendency to hose the entire network and
grinding everything to a halt, but it also limits all other uploads, so vnc
Hello, LARTC-List
I still try to get my traffic-shaping done with Wondershaper 1.1a, but it does not work
as expected. When I run the script, the verbose output looks good (using a
SuSE-8.2-SMP-box with iproute2-2.4.7-473):
+ DOWNLINK=1800
+ UPLINK=150
+ DEV=ppp0
+ NOPRIOHOSTSRC=
+ NOPRIOHOSTDST
Hallo, Trevor
> Maybe we can help you out much better if you could space out the
> sentences below. They seem to be a jigsaw puzzle.
Sorry, you are right - I think my word-wrapping is messing this up. I'll
post it again, disregarding line lengths.
This is the verbose output when the script star
Michael,
Maybe we can help you out much better if you could space out the
sentences below. They seem to be a jigsaw puzzle.
Trevor
On Sat, 2003-07-12 at 20:12, Michael Frotscher wrote:
> Hello, LARTC-List
>
> I try to get my traffic-shaping done with Wondershaper 1.1a. When I run
> the script
Hello, LARTC-List
I try to get my traffic-shaping done with Wondershaper 1.1a. When I run
the script, the verbose output looks good (using a SuSE-8.2-box with
iproute2-2.4.7-473):
+ DOWNLINK=1800
+ UPLINK=150
+ DEV=ppp0
+ NOPRIOHOSTSRC=
+ NOPRIOHOSTDST=
+ NOPRIOPORTSRC=
+ NOPRIOPORTDST=
+ '[' ''
Believe L7 filtering matches kaaza. http://l7.sourceforge.net.
Mohan
>On Wednesday 28 May 2003 04:07, Paul Suela wrote:
>> Sir,
>>
>> Thanks for the wondershaper utility!
>>
>> It has improved the response time for my ssh connections to my home
>> server whenever i need to access it from the Inter
On Wednesday 28 May 2003 04:07, Paul Suela wrote:
> Sir,
>
> Thanks for the wondershaper utility!
>
> It has improved the response time for my ssh connections to my home
> server whenever i need to access it from the Internet.
>
> However, is there a way to setup a bandwidth, say 10kbits/sec (i onl
Sir,
Thanks for the wondershaper utility!
It has improved the response time for my ssh connections to my home
server whenever i need to access it from the Internet.
However, is there a way to setup a bandwidth, say 10kbits/sec (i only
have 128kbits/sec DSL), and assign it to a particular traff
> i have the prob with my cable modem where the upload gets messed up with the
> download. So I donwload and tried the wondershaper script, but it seems to make my
> connection worst. If I start a download, and I'll get 180+K/s, then with a upload
> going it'll go down to about 50-60K/s. When I run
Giles,
: I think I'll use htbinit, seems the most understandable. Seems a waste
: that people with lots of experience who are very into this stuff don't
: compile all the findings into a generic script(s) with parameters that
: any newbie can configure and benefit from.
The problem is a compl
e-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin A. Brown
> Sent: 31 March 2003 20:59
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [LARTC] Wondershaper updates.
>
>
> If you want a more general configuration interfac
If you want a more general configuration interface to HTB, you can use
htb.init, which allows an arbitrary configuration of traffic control:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/htbinit
Or, if you prefer a more fully featured language for describing traffic,
tcng:
http://tcng.sourceforge.net/
Se
Wondershaper htb seems to work fine. It would be great if it had some
more features. I.E if people on this mailing list could contribute. I
use a fantastic contributed firewall script called monmotha that covers
lots of the features that you might want from a firewall.
I'd find it useful if wonde
e.
- Thus higher priorities rules (lower MARK numbers) should go first in your
script, otherwise they might be overruled by later rules.
Jannes Faber
- Original Message -
From: "Ciprian Niculescu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Tornado" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAI
On Mon, 30 Dec 2002 22:22:28 +0100, "Tornado"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > >
> > this is what i try, beacouse i dont realy play the game, i generate
> > trafic to saturate the link, and ping from shell from an externat host
>
> In which case, you should check if your downstream is not chocking. E
> >
> > Is it the ICMP ping (generated by the 'ping' tool), or do you mean when
> > you
> > play Counter-Strike, and you look at the players tab, that shows you're
> > lagged with 300ms?
>
> by ping i meen the real ping program with icmp, i see that i could not
> specify counterstrike to don't crea
On Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:49:58 +0100, "Tornado"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Hey there,
>
> Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, maybe not - but what exactly do you mean
> by
> "the ping from the server is always 300ms"?
>
> Is it the ICMP ping (generated by the 'ping' tool), or do you mean when
> you
>
Hey there,
> hello,
>
> a friend of mine have this configuration:
>
> 10 x PC -- router/linux/rh8 -- ADSL Modem -- ISP
>
> let's say that the bandwidth is: 5M and 800K
>
> he does dc++ and counter-strike, so let's say the UP is full, and the
> ping from the counter server is 300ms, the server cut
Hi,(Sorry for the repost last post was screwed up by my
emailclient)I think that imcp is not the solution. I've tested
with mohaa and that game uses an own sort of ping on a udp port (so via
tcp and not imcp)Maby u should check if counterstrike does that
too.Regards,Andre> hello,> > a
friend of min
Hi,I think that imcp is not the solution. I've tested with mohaa
and that game uses an own sort of ping on a udp port (so via tcp and not
imcp)Maby u should check if counterstrike does that
too.Regards,Andre> hello,> > a
friend of mine have this configuration:> > 10 x PC --
router/linux/rh8 -- ADSL
hello,
a friend of mine have this configuration:
10 x PC -- router/linux/rh8 -- ADSL Modem -- ISP
let's say that the bandwidth is: 5M and 800K
he does dc++ and counter-strike, so let's say the UP is full, and the
ping from the counter server is 300ms, the server cut the connection, and
no more
On Wednesday 18 December 2002 23:22, Kenneth Porter wrote:
> --On Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:43 PM +0100 Stef Coene
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm not sure, but the policer can calculate the rate in the class in 2
> > ways. And maybe your CPU can't handle the calculations. What CPU
--On Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:53 PM +0100 Jose Luis Domingo Lopez
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As far as I know, inbound traffic (ingress) can only police packets,
> that is, discard traffic on excess hoping the other end will notice it
> and slow down a bit. If you want to classify incomin
--On Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:43 PM +0100 Stef Coene
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not sure, but the policer can calculate the rate in the class in 2
> ways. And maybe your CPU can't handle the calculations. What CPU do
> you have and what's the load on the sstem?
It's a P2-233 with
On Tuesday, 17 December 2002, at 14:15:39 -0800,
Kenneth Porter wrote:
> What about the ingress policer would do that?
>
As far as I know, inbound traffic (ingress) can only police packets,
that is, discard traffic on excess hoping the other end will notice it
and slow down a bit. If you want to
On Tuesday 17 December 2002 23:15, Kenneth Porter wrote:
> I tried installing the WonderShaper on my internal link, mostly to get the
> SFQ installed. I set uplink and downlink to 10 to match the link speed
> and changed the bandwidth on the cbq line to 100mbit. This killed transfer
> speed *to
I tried installing the WonderShaper on my internal link, mostly to get the
SFQ installed. I set uplink and downlink to 10 to match the link speed
and changed the bandwidth on the cbq line to 100mbit. This killed transfer
speed *to* the box, knocking it from 30-40 Mbps down to about 800 kbps.
Co
--On Monday, November 25, 2002 12:16 AM +0100 Mario Ohnewald
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I started an upload to see if it worked, but i still had a ping >1000
> It didnt really change anything.
> The output of wondershaper was fine, no errors came up.
What did "wshaper status" say after the simu
Hello!
I want to give port 14567 a high priority/minumum delay because its a onlien
game.
I took wondershaper cause its fairly easy to understand. AND i read the
HowTo, especially Section 9!!
DOWNLINK=786
UPLINK=128
DEV=ppp0
# start filters
# TOS Minimum Delay (ssh, NOT scp) in 1:10:
tc filter ad
On Wed, 20 Nov 2002 20:09:23 +0100
Stef Coene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 20 November 2002 19:46, K Sambaiah wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I am newbie to the list. I am using the wondershaper on RH Linux
> > 7.3 machine. wondershaper version is 1.1a. I set it up as
> > upload speed xkbps and
On Wednesday 20 November 2002 19:46, K Sambaiah wrote:
> Hi,
> I am newbie to the list. I am using the wondershaper on RH Linux
> 7.3 machine. wondershaper version is 1.1a. I set it up as
> upload speed xkbps and download speed y kbps. I needed to setup
> total speed as x+y kbps but dynamically a
Hi,
I am newbie to the list. I am using the wondershaper on RH Linux
7.3 machine. wondershaper version is 1.1a. I set it up as
upload speed xkbps and download speed y kbps. I needed to setup
total speed as x+y kbps but dynamically adjust uplink and download
speeds. Is there any way to do it.
than
On Monday 04 November 2002 11:11, Kenneth Porter wrote:
> I'd like to put all UDP traffic from ports 28000-28099 into the
> high-priority queue that WonderShaper creates. (This is game traffic, so
> it's highly sensitive to latency and dropping. Alas, the game authors
> didn't mark the packets for
I'd like to put all UDP traffic from ports 28000-28099 into the
high-priority queue that WonderShaper creates. (This is game traffic, so
it's highly sensitive to latency and dropping. Alas, the game authors
didn't mark the packets for QoS.) What would be the best way to insure it
gets into the righ
On Monday 23 September 2002 01:16, Kristoffer Ottosson wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have two lucent wlancards and one 3com ethernet card running on my box.
> I'm running routing tables with iproute2 in order to route all the packets
> correctly ... Now I wonder, I should be able to use wondershaper on top of
Hi
I have two lucent wlancards and one 3com ethernet
card running on my box.
I'm running routing tables with iproute2 in order
to route all the packets correctly ... Now I wonder, I should be able to use
wondershaper on top of this, right?
When I try to run wondershaper, it does nothing,
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
