On Sunday 04 January 2004 5:33 pm, Roy wrote: > > I have read about people having lots of problems with IMQ. So I just > > wanted to > > > try it and see how stable it is on my box. I gather it could actually > > be problems with the Kernel and not the IMQ code?? > > That is possible but prpbably not because of bug in kernel I > as I think it is because kernel handles local trafic diferently than > forwarded > > so you cant use imq to shape trafic generated by server > I am comtinuing development of imq abd I face this problem most of the > time. Do you mean because it crashes ? I seem to be able to shape upstream from my gateway and forward OK using IMQ - I know I don't really need it for up because I could mark, and the nat patch only works down, but I've been testing the jdg script recently and haven't managed a crash yet. I am only on a home network that gets shutdown after 18 hours, though. > > > I think that sounds even more messy :-) > > I only wanted to ingress shape with IMQ to ensure that I don't drop > > UDP or small TCP ACK packets for upload streams. I guess I will just > > give up on the idea and using ingress policing... Its not so important > > anyway > > as my > > > DSL connection is very asymetric (2mbit D/L; 256kbit U/L) and upload > > shaping is more important. > > if only want to shape incoming trafic probably you can use imq quite > safely, > > anyway as I see you dont need it at all you can easily shape all uploads > anyway > and since your download speed is high enough you dont need to worry > about it. > > however imq can be usefull to control trafic so that you can download > with kaza and browse web or play game without high latency. ______________________________________________ > LARTC mailing list / LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
