AF> Do you know roughly how many active connections you have? Up to 30K. AF> I think SFQ should be better than HTB default FIFO. None works... [read ahead] >> BTW. I though if it could be caused ie. by hacked TCP stack of some >> hosts or turned off windows_scaling feature of tcp... ? AF> I think the fact it's on by default in Linux now hurts - It's off by AF> default in Windows AFAIK. Are the senders on your LAN using Linux or AF> Windows? 99% windows users. However I just found propably reason of issue... As p2p is both direction transfer most of it sends large ACK packets. After short investigation there are some facts: 1) 40% of p2p ACK packets have payload larger than 1KB, other are regular ACKs 2) 15% of all other traffic ACKs are longer than 1KB, 85% are regular ACKs. I have priority class only for regular short ACKs, so other goes to custom p2p class. Cause ACKs have to be send after receiving some data propably that's why I can't slow down traffic to defined value. Every time customer receive p2p data, sends LARGE ACK. Outcome is that shaping p2p upload have impact on p2p download and vice versa or in other words, to shape upload, shape download also. Giving extra prio for large ACKs would be suicide. I suppose the only way to shape p2p is to dominate it by hard limits [up/down]. Please correct me if it's fake [and give an advise ;)]. -- Regards Tomasz Wrona _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
