Re: New HTB-derived qdisc for accounting?

Linux Advanced Routing and Traffic Control

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> Patrick McHardy schrieb:
> 
>>Why do you want to decrease speed as the quota is approached?
> 
> 
> We have two phases (simplified):
> 1. Already sent traffic is less than htbq_squota
>      -> Do not limit anything.
> 2. Already sent traffic is more than htbq_squota
>      -> Limit the rate to something which allows the quota
>         to be filled completely in the remainig time.
> 
> Most people stay below htbq_squota and do not notice
> anything at all, i.e. they get full wire speed. Power users
> will cause more traffic than htb_squota and be limited so
> they can't get over htbq_quota. Since it is impossible to
> send faster than htb_rate, htb_rate will stay constant if
> it is fully utilized. If htb_rate is not fully utilized,
> the speed will actually *increase* over time.

Ok, so why do you want to prevent people from sending from
htbq_squota to htbq_quota at full speed? Isn't the important
point that noone sends more than their quota? Dynamic rate
adaption is not easy, HTB needs pre-calculated rate tables,
with HFSC it is even more complicated and can cause short
periods of unfairness.

>>Wouldn't a simple per-class quota or a quota-ematch work as
>>well?
> 
> That would be easier, but I can't see how to realize the
> process above with a quota-ematch. Especially the dynamic
> rate adaption needs something more than just quota.
> Probably one could combine quota-ematch with some userspace
> hackery to achieve what I want, but it would require to
> statically set up 65536 classes for a /16 network. Hm.
> The only difference to my solution would be that we need
> a quota ematch instead of a htb_quota qdisc and rate control
> would be done in userspace.
> 
> So where can I find code doing a quota ematch?

Nowhere I guess, but shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes
to write one. It would have the same problems as with iptables
however, it doesn't get feedback about dropped packets. A per-class
quota inside the qdisc is probably the best way.

Regards
Patrick
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc

[Index of Archives]     [LARTC Home Page]     [Netfilter]     [Netfilter Development]     [Network Development]     [Bugtraq]     [GCC Help]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Fedora Users]
  Powered by Linux