Stef Coene, thank you for your feed-back. I have already read docum.org... The tests proved a difference of max 20Kbps between theory and real life for cbq. In my case practically nobody is limited... In my scripts there are classes with prio 8... you say max is 7... could this be the problem? Could it be possible that on hard traffic cbq to just let pass packets? This is a stupid question I guess... Do I have a chance solving the problem by swtching to HTB? This is what MRTG says about one of my 14.4Kbps clients :-) Max In 234.4 kb/s (2.3%) Average In 76.0 kb/s (0.8%) Current In 872.0 b/s (0.0%) Any opinion on 'Traffic Shaper'? I'm considering changing the shaping tool... MT On Wednesday 12 March 2003 16:49, Mugur TOMITA wrote: > Hi everybody, > > I'm new to this list, so I appologize if a similar case has been covered > already... I have the configuration attached below... > The problem is that my traffic control doesn't work at all... > Clients from any of the private networks manage to download even with > 256Kbits from the Internet... > The case is stranger because if I reboot the linux box, for a few minutes > the traffic shapping seems to work... I mean from a machine in subnet > 192.168.1.8/29 I download with 16-20Kbits... but not always (most often I > get at least 128Kbps). > > A second question would be who has a higher priority: > a PC from a prio 8 class filtered by a prio 3 filter, or > a PC from a prio 3 class filtered by a prio 8 filter? Prio for filters is used to order the filters. Filters with lower prio are checked first. Prio for a class is something else. A class with a lower prio is allowed to send data first before the other classes. And prio 7 is the biggest prio you can specify. I found no errors in your tc rules. If you want more info about cbq (tests/docs/scripts/tips/faq/...) you can go to http://docum.org. Stef -- stef.coene@xxxxxxxxx "Using Linux as bandwidth manager" http://www.docum.org/ #lartc @ irc.oftc.net
