> On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 19:57 -0700, Tom Eastep wrote:
>> On Oct 13, 2011, at 7:27 PM, Tom Eastep wrote:
>> > On Oct 13, 2011, at 7:18 PM, Tom Eastep wrote:
>> >> On Oct 13, 2011, at 1:22 PM, Simon Matter wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Tom, did you test with complex TC or simple TC?
>> >>> I've just tested adding burst on one of the existing EL4 systems and
>> it
>> >>> indeed increases the download speed to almost full speed. However,
>> the
>> >>> same config on the EL6 box just doesn't work at all even with the
>> latest
>> >>> official RHEL6.1 kernel.
>> >>
>> >> I tested using Simple TC.
>> >>
>> > As far as I know, IN-BANDWIDTH handling is identical in Internal and
>> Simple.
>> >
>> I just configured my Centos6 box with complex TC and it worked just the
>> same.
>>
>
> Grasping at straws, here is the Tc.pm that I'm releasing in 4.4.25 Beta
> 2. While my testing shows that it makes IN-BANDWIDTH enforcement more
> accurate, I am not hopeful that it will help your issue.

Thanks Tom, I appreciate your help!
I have tried the whole thing as you did with KVM - and of course it worked
as it did for you.
Finally, before giving up, I went to the box, put in a simple USB ethenet
adapter, and voilĂ  - it works perfec :)
That means to me it must be some of the offloading stuff. I tried the
settings from the shorewall FAQ but without success, so I have to check
again, I either did something wrong in the tests or my adapter needs other
settings. I'll come back with more infos.

Regards,
Simon


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a
definitive record of customers, application performance, security
threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-oct
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-users mailing list
Shorewall-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users

Reply via email to