Hi would it be possible to post the scripts that set this up ??? Alex On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 05:55:36PM +0100, Neil Greatorex wrote: > Many thanks to both of you for your replies. > > I have managed to get the setup working how I intended now - by using HTB > classes/qdiscs. I had tried this approach before as one of many, however > what I had failed to do was create the two classes I am filtering the > traffic into as subclasses of a parent HTB class that was limited to the > rate of the connection. Now it works as I intended! > > I'm now going to tackle the harder problem of doing it for downloading - I'm > off to play with IMQ :-) > > Again, many thanks for your suggestions/advice! > > Cheers, > Neil > > -- > #include "sig.h" > #define NAME "Neil Greatorex" > #define E-MAIL "neil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" > > http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=affiliates&id=7889&t=58 > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: lartc-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > [mailto:lartc-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of kraquen > > Sent: 24 September 2004 6:36 AM > > To: jasonb@xxxxxxxxxx > > Cc: lartc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: Re: Prioritizing forwarded traffic over > > locally generated traffic > > > > Sounds to me like he's trying to match via source IP.. which > > would catch > > everything just fine.. > > > > Niel, > > I do something very similar, its fairly simple.. > > > > you want to mark packets in your prerouting, then match > > against them in > > your qdiscs.. > > > > i use an htb.. my upload link can handle about 85 kilobytes / sec. > > > > I have several classes that match with various rates, the cieling for > > all of them is ~80 > > > > Then i have a class that matches the mark that i use for that > > specific IP. > > > > That mark goes into a class with a rate of 2 KB/s and a cieling of 75 > > > > that class gets 75 when nothing else is running, and 2 if > > other classes > > are filling it up. > > > > Hope this helps, > > Jason > > Jason Boxman wrote: > > > > >On Thursday 23 September 2004 18:09, Neil Greatorex wrote: > > > > > > > > >>Hi, > > >> > > >>I'm a complete newbie at this traffic shaping / QoS stuff > > so please excuse > > >>me if this is a silly question. I've searched and searched > > on Google and I > > >>just end up confusing myself even more, so I thought I'd > > post my question > > >>to this list and see whether someone can help me! > > >> > > >> > > > > > >Sure. > > > > > > > > > > > >>Basically, I am running a Linux box as a NAT router on my > > home network > > >>(machine name marvin). I want to use mldonkey on the router > > box for P2P > > >>downloads. What I wish to do, is to have any traffic that > > originates on the > > >>internal LAN take priority over traffic that is generated > > from mldonkey on > > >>marvin. I don't wish to restrict the maximum bandwidth for the P2P > > >>downloads on a permanent basis if I can help it - so that > > all the bandwidth > > >>is used all of the time. > > >> > > >> > > > > > >So you'd like to classify p2p traffic from mldonkey > > (Overnet/Kad/eDonkey) such > > >that it is granted a lower priority than other traffic? Not > > a problem. > > >However, because those three protocols use random ports, you > > cannot classify > > >'edonkey' traffic based on port. You can use either ipp2p > > or L7-Filter to > > >match these flows based on layer 7 pattern matching, though. > > > > > > > > > > > >>My plan was to use the PREROUTING and OUTPUT chains of the > > mangle table to > > >>mark the packets, and then use some form of qdisc/class > > structure that will > > >>prioritise one over the other. > > >> > > >> > > > > > >I believe you can use the POSTROUTING chain of the mangle > > table and nab all > > >traffic. L7-Filter has a nice graphic[1] available. > > > > > >[1] http://l7-filter.sourceforge.net/PacketFlow.png > > > > > > > > > > > >>The aim of this is to have an upload that would normally take say 20 > > >>seconds from a machine on the LAN still take 20 seconds > > when mldonkey is > > >>uploading - so the NAT traffic will take all the bandwidth away from > > >>mldonkey. The closer to this aim I can get the better! > > >> > > >> > > > > > >That makes sense, although the time interval is relative to > > the data size and > > >protocol being used, so it isn't a useful measure for the > > rest of us. What's > > >the link size? What's the file / data size? > > > > > > > > > > > >>To test implementations, I am using SFTP to upload a file > > from both a > > >>machine on my internal network (named slartibartfast), and > > marvin (the > > >>router machine) simultaneously. The perfect behaviour would > > be for the > > >>upload on slartibartfast to take 20 seconds, and the upload > > on marvin to > > >>take 40. > > >> > > >> > > > > > >Which implementations have you tried to use? I'd imagine > > Wondershaper? > > >Others? > > > > > > > > > > > >>I have tried various setups of qdiscs and classes, using > > various examples > > >>from all over the web (including the LARTC FAQ/cookbook) > > but I haven't been > > >>able to get anywhere near my aim. All of the attempts I've > > made have led to > > >>both uploads taking near enough 40 seconds, as they are > > both running at 50% > > >>of the available bandwidth. I would like it to give almost all the > > >>bandwidth to slartibartfast for the first 20 seconds, and > > then all the > > >>bandwidth to marvin for the remaining time. > > >> > > >> > > > > > >The problem is likely that you cannot effectively match p2p > > flows that use the > > >'edonkey' protocols. (Actually, the latest L7-Filter > > pattern matches do not > > >yet match eMule's new Kad network, so you'll still need to > > either disable > > >support for that in mldonkey or deal with latency issues that arise.) > > > > > > > > > > > >>I would really appreciate it if someone could tell me whether: > > >>a) This setup is actually possible! > > >> > > >> > > > > > >Absolutely! > > > > > > > > > > > >>b) If using the mangle table chains is correct for this > > >> > > >> > > > > > >I believe so. > > > > > > > > > > > >>c) If it is, the easiest/best/fastest way to implement it. > > Just some hints > > >>for the right direction would be fine! > > >> > > >> > > > > > >You might explore my guide[2]. I have a setup quite similar > > to the one you > > >wish to implement, except on my router does not generate any > > traffic. (I > > >have mldonkey running on an internal machine instead.) > > > > > >[2] http://trekweb.com/~jasonb/articles/traffic_shaping/ > > > > > > > > > > > >>Many thanks in advance, > > >>Neil Greatorex > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >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/ >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
