Walt, I cannot tell you about Fedora, I'm not a user of it.
I would suggest you ask it on IMQ mailling list. Maybe there is somebody using Fedora there who can help. If you find nothing please send me in pvt exactly what were your steps and the error messages you got on the way.
Andre
Walt Wyndroski wrote:
Actually, I do have a question concerning fedora core 2, iptables-1.2.9 and above, and IMQ. The problem is as follows:
I easily got IMQ compiled into the 2.6.6 kernel on FC2. I'm using iptables-1.2.9. I could not get iptables-1.2.9 to recompile. I kept getting errors about using glibc headers instead. I found a patch for iptables Makefile which fixed that. However, the shared library (libipt_IMQ.so) would never get created.
Is something wrong with the kernel headers from the Fedora kernel-sourcecode rpm?
I realize that this is not entirely related to the LARTC list.
Regards,
Walt Wyndroski
----- Original Message ----- From: "Andre Correa" <andre.correa@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Walt Wyndroski" <wdwrn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <lartc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2004 2:07 PM
Subject: Re: Simply IMQ
Hi Walt, I'm the "Correa" from your list. In fact www.linuximq.net is a project from a group of people, not just me, who are working on: Devera->McHardy IMQ's code that was unmantained and now is alive again.
We can tell you that there is a lot of people in our mailling list who reports using IMQ in production, including myself, with great stability. My server is up for more then 160 days with around 100 PPPoE users on it all the time. I run it on other shapping servers as well.
We've eing working on IMQ last months and now there are stable versions for 2.4 and 2.6 kernels (up to 2.6.7), and one beta version being tested. In your scenario you better get the stable versions:
Patch for Linux-2.6.1 up to 2.6.7 - http://www.linuximq.net/patchs/linux-2.6.2-imq-4.diff
Patch for Linux-2.4.24 / 2.4.25 / 2.4.26 - http://www.linuximq.net/patchs/linux-2.4.26-imq.diff
Patch for iptables up to 1.2.11 - http://www.linuximq.net/patchs/iptables-1.2.9-imq1.diff
I don't know if someone used IMQ in a 27Mbps link but it is worth trying. I would like to invite you to visit our site at www.linuximq.net and join our low traffic mailling list.
If you ever decide to give our beta patch a try, it has some corrections and implementations as follows:
- Correction of ipv6 support "+"s issue (Hasso Tepper) - Correction of imq_init_devs() issue that resulted in kernel OOPS unloading IMQ as module (Norbert Buchmuller) - Addition of functionality to choose number of IMQ devices during kernel config (Andre Correa) - Addition of functionality to choose how IMQ hooks on PRE and POSTROUTING (after or before NAT) (Andre Correa) - Cosmetic corrections (Norbert Buchmuller) (Andre Correa)
Please let us know if we can help you somehow.
Good Luck!
Andre
Walt Wyndroski wrote:
I've followed this list for quite a long time and have even posted a
couple
of times. I used the early versions of IMQ from Devik (I think that was
his
name), and it worked well. I only ever got the chance to implement it in
my
test environment. I now need to implement it in my production
environment.
My Linux core router has nine interfaces and has a 27 megabit connection
to
the internet. It is quite busy much of the time. It runs Fedora Core 1
now
but will most likely be upgraded to Fedora Core 2 in the next month or
so.
Now with all that said, here is my question. I see that maintenance of
IMQ
has been passed on a couple of times. I see some people say that IMQ is
not
stable and should not be put into a production environment. My use of
IMQ a
year ago invovled only egress qdiscs using HTB and SFQ because the
egress
qdiscs were much more powerful and better than the ingress qdisc. The
only
problem that I ever had with IMQ was using the iptables target with both PREROUTING and POSTROUTING. I see Roy has posted that IMQ essentially crashes when doing egress shaping. Is this correct? I've always
understood
egress as outbound shaping/filtering and ingress as inbound shaping/filtering. I say that because I saw in an earlier post by Roy
that
he changed his terminology to INPUT,OUTPUT, and FORWARD. Was he not
using
the terms egress and ingress correctly? I see that the current 'big'
problem
is touching locally generated traffic. What I need to know is which
version
of IMQ is most stable for kernel 2.6? Or even kernel2.4? Is it Devera's? McHardy's? Correa's? or Roy's? Or should I just leave it alone? My
apologies
if I got names wrong.
This is probably a long email just to ask that question, but I can't
seem to
find an answer from the list archives. I downloaded the whole 46 mb
archive
and essentially read 90% of the posts related to IMQ. I'm just trying to
get
a good understanding of what's happening with/to IMQ.
Thank you in advance for any advice.
Walt Wyndroski
_______________________________________________ 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/
_______________________________________________ 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/
