On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 04:58:19PM +0100, Peter Surda wrote: > I hope people won't mind if I mention my project again: > http://www.shurdix.org We're happy to receive any reply at all, really... :-) > Your situation is however special because you have squid. Combining > squid and tc is problematic. I agree; so far I haven't been able to shape squid traffic the way I want it to. However, shouldn't rshaper suffer from the same issues? It should at least be possible to do something similar to rshaper using tc. > However, there were some kind guys who designed the "tproxy" iptables > extension, which can help you. It isn't easy to setup and if you have > NAT you need 2 separate machines (one doing the NAT and one running > the squid), but is doable. This way tc will see squid's traffic with > the IP of the real client. These are about the most interesting lines I've seen on this topic. However, I'm in a small home network situation, so even having just one dedicated linux machine is luxury. So any solution that requires separate machines is not feasible for me. > My recommendation for your situation would be something like this: > - keep your router, let it do NAT and perhaps a minimal firewall > - get a second machine, put it between the router and the LAN, and > install shurdix there > - configure it to use TC and Squid (and optionally IP accounting and/or > firewall if you like). No delay pools necessary. Other possibilities are: - Never touch a running system. (If it works, why not leave as is?) - Find out how exactly rshaper limits and/or distributes up- and download bandwidth for * User <-> Internet * User <-> User * Internet <-> Squid (and other caches, DNS etc.) * Squid (and others?) <-> User and use this information to build a tc class tree. - If you want to keep rshaper, port it to 2.6 by yourself ;-) Regards, Andreas Klauer _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
