Ed Wildgoose <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
I would be interested to hear if anyone has a CBQ based setup and can
tell me if that patch works for them? Or even whether it works on the
incoming policer properly?
Would that work with HFSC ?
what about PPPoE ? i didn't really understand what I have to change if
I'm using PPPoE and MTU=1492.
After further investigation I think you need the patch a little more like this for PPPoE and the params you gave (Andy do you think this looks OK?) Please let me know if this works for you.
(As near as I can tell, there is no PPP overhead(?), and you then basically encapsulate your packets in IP packets of max size 1492, with an 8 byte overhead - Perhaps Andy can correct me as to whether there is still a PPP overhead?)
--- iproute2-2.4.7.20020116/tc/tc_core.c 2000-04-16 18:42:55.000000000 +0100
+++ iproute2/tc/tc_core.c 2004-06-18 12:20:39.912974518 +0100
@@ -59,10 +59,19 @@
while ((mtu>>cell_log) > 255)
cell_log++;
}
+
+ // HACK - UK ATM Params
+ int encaps_cell_sz = 1492;
+ int encaps_cell_overhead = 8;
+ int encaps_data_sz = encaps_cell_sz - encaps_cell_overhead;
+ int proto_overhead = 0; // PPP Overhead
+
for (i=0; i<256; i++) {
- unsigned sz = (i<<cell_log);
- if (sz < mpu)
- sz = mpu;
+ unsigned sz = ((i+1)<<cell_log)-1;
+ sz = sz + proto_overhead;
+ sz = ( (int)((sz-1)/encaps_data_sz) + 1) * encaps_cell_sz;
+// if (sz < mpu)
+// sz = mpu;
rtab[i] = tc_core_usec2tick(1000000*((double)sz/bps));
}
return cell_log;
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
