Was just reading over the script, and remembered that I re-installed it fresh... it's *not* slightly modified as stated below, other than the d/u link numbers... the noprio stuff is all empty... On Fri, 2002-10-04 at 14:14, Mattt wrote: > Hi all, > > I've gotten the WonderShaper (slightly modified) running on the > router. We have a 512/128 connection, and I set DOWNLINK=300, UPLINK=100 > (the link is currently under-utilised, and huge performance is not > required at this stage). All appears well (at least, it's stable), but I > have two questions. > > Firstly, given that the link is *very* under-utilised, does the > following output look reasonable? It looks as if only qdisc has actually > seen traffic : > > ========== > jenner:/etc/firewall/wondershaper-1.1a# ./wshaper status > qdisc ingress ffff: ---------------- > Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0) > > qdisc sfq 30: quantum 1514b perturb 10sec > Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0) > > qdisc sfq 20: quantum 1514b perturb 10sec > Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0) > > qdisc sfq 10: quantum 1514b perturb 10sec > Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0) > > qdisc cbq 1: rate 10Mbit (bounded,isolated) prio no-transmit > Sent 2896610 bytes 29310 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0) > borrowed 0 overactions 0 avgidle 624 undertime 0 > > class cbq 1: root rate 10Mbit (bounded,isolated) prio no-transmit > Sent 2896610 bytes 29310 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0) > borrowed 0 overactions 0 avgidle 624 undertime 0 > class cbq 1:10 parent 1:1 leaf 10: rate 100Kbit prio 1 > Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0) > borrowed 0 overactions 0 avgidle 624 undertime 0 > class cbq 1:1 parent 1: rate 100Kbit (bounded,isolated) prio 5 > Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0) > borrowed 0 overactions 0 avgidle 624 undertime 0 > class cbq 1:20 parent 1:1 leaf 20: rate 90Kbit prio 2 > Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0) > borrowed 0 overactions 0 avgidle 624 undertime 0 > class cbq 1:30 parent 1:1 leaf 30: rate 80Kbit prio 2 > Sent 0 bytes 0 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0) > borrowed 0 overactions 0 avgidle 624 undertime 0 > jenner:/etc/firewall/wondershaper-1.1a# > ========== > > Also, I'm noticing a fair wait before, for instance, downloading a web > site (although the phenomenom is also quite apparent over at least most > protocols, though). Say, perhaps, 1 or 2 seconds before *any* page > 'instantaneously' appears ;-) > > We run our own DNS, as well as a DNS cache (the djbdns package), so > lookups should not be causing a problem (in fact, they're not - this > only happens to traffic leaving the DSL interface). > > I realise that DSL latency isn't as good as some other technologies, > but is this something I should be able to minimise the effect of? > > Admittedly, it sounds to me as if the traffic is still queuing at the > modem - have I simply done something stupid? I'm applying the qdiscs to > eth3 rather than ppp0 (as applying them to ppp0 would oops the kernel > after less than a minute or two reliably...). > > I'm new to lartc, but learning (through necessity). I can't help but > feel that my questions here are actually related - the lack of counter > data on the qdiscs, the classic symtoms(?) of DSL latency... Is it even > working for me? > > -- > Cheers, > Mattt. icq : 117539757 > aboveNetworks www : www.above.nq4u.net > mattt@above.nq4u.net jabber: mattt@jabber.above.nq4u.net > > What's got four legs and an arm? A happy Pit Bull... > > _______________________________________________ > LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl > http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ > -- Cheers, Mattt. icq : 117539757 aboveNetworks www : www.above.nq4u.net mattt@above.nq4u.net jabber: mattt@jabber.above.nq4u.net What's got four legs and an arm? A happy Pit Bull... _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
