Well, my problem was like that: I've got Box to NAT and traffic shaping. >From time to time i cant ping anythin - i just loose connection because of tc - when delete tc classes the conection comes back. I've posted my script to the list but i'm attaching it for you now too. I'm shaping by ip dst (down my network) and by marking packets (up). Lately I've added special class for my NAT machine and it helped. And my last observation is that it has been working for about 24h; and then I added "prio 0" to my filters and everything has braken. But when i removed prio and reset machine it wasnt come back to the state before i added prio. (Grrrrr damn thing). I've noticed that if there is small traffic (in night when 14 hosts are up) the connection is stable. I'mn attaching my script. It's simple - I have private networks 192.168.1.0 192.168.2.0 192.168.3.0 192.168.4.0 192.168.6.0, so the hosts are in files ipX for example for network 192.168.2.0 this file is ip2 and so on. This script is quite long because of a few loops :). Thanks for your help. > The problem I had actually had to do with a perl script. I was unable to > enter more than 2045 commands using the script. If I were you, I'd try > changing that prio to something more reasonable to your needs just in > case. If that doesn't work, just post your problem in as much detail as > possible and I'll see what I can do (if you haven't already). > > Adam Towarnyckyj > > -----Original Message----- > From: mjoachimiak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:mjoachimiak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 5:45 PM > To: adamt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: TC Hashing Filters > > Could you please send me describe of your problem because im on the > list > from short time and dont have this description and i have problem with > tc > too. I saw i have prio set to some strange number like 49456 or somthing > like that. My problem was i loose connection from LAN computer( there is > no > ping ) from time to time. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Adam Towarnyckyj" <adamt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: <lartc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 11:07 PM > Subject: RE: TC Hashing Filters > > > > Dear list, > > After much code crunching and beating my head against the wall > > (literally), I discovered the faulty code. Thanks mostly to gypsy who > > played a huge role in helping me discover the problem. My tc filter > line > > had an error in it which completely baffles me because it worked up > > until 2045 lines were entered. > > > > Old command: > > tc filter add dev $dev protocol ip parent 12: u32 ht 2:$table1: ht > > 3:$table2: match ip dst $ip/32 flowid 12:$classid > > > > New command: > > tc filter add dev $dev protocol ip parent 12: prio 5 u32 ht 2:$table1: > > ht 3:$table2: match ip dst $ip/32 flowid 12:$classid > > > > Who would have thought that a prio would cause that much trouble? I > > mean, I know in the documentation it says that it is required for > CLASS > > commands, but since there's nothing on filters, I had no clue. And > > usually if a command requires a parameter, it will error immediately > and > > not wait for 2045 entries. Also, why the hell would the priority cause > a > > problem like that to begin with?! > > > > Weird. Anyways, THANKS EVERYONE! (gypsy, Catalin, and Ed especially) > It > > all works, it's very resource friendly, and all is good again (and I > get > > to keep my job)! The processor is only about 20% in use now. I'm very > > grateful for the hashing filter suggestion from Ed. Thanks a ton. I > will > > be posting a How To shortly so others can do the same if they ever > need > > to. Thanks again! > > > > Adam Towarnyckyj > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: lartc-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lartc-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > On Behalf Of gypsy > > Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 8:37 PM > > To: adamt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; LARTC > > Subject: Re: TC Hashing Filters > > > > Adam Towarnyckyj wrote: > > > Any tc filter command I try to > > > add from here on out gives me the same error even if I try it > manually > > > instead of using the script. > > > > Adam, > > > > That is a killer. > > > > Please read the following and then, when we both have the same > > information, I'm going to try again to assist you. > > > > HINT TO READERS: I hope someone else will help us both because I have > > obligations that I'm stealing time from that I can ill afford. > > > > There is a LARTC mailing list thread dated (about) 24 thru 26 June > 2003 > > between Trevor Warren and Michael Ulitskiy whose Subject is "u32 > > clarification...limits on 2000>???" > > > > Please use your favorite method to find it. Note that there may be > > kernel issues not mentioned by them; kernels change. > > > > I'd like to suggest that you see if anyone involved in that thread > will > > send you a testing script; perhaps you could find a way to start with > a > > working setup and then apply minor changes until either it breaks or > it > > suits you. > > _______________________________________________ > > 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/
