>> This is the most braindead defect of Linux (IMHO): You can't, because >> you can only shape outgoing traffic on an interface. > > Yes, you can. Easily. And you don't need IMQ/IFB. > > eth1->eth0 and wlan0->eth0 are easy. Classical outgoing shaping. > eth0->eth1 and eth0->wlan0 are similar. Outgoing shaping on eth1 and > wlan0 each with a limit of half the incoming bandwidth of eth0. This is exactly what I'm doing now, and it's not an optimal solution. It's a rather stupid hack that gets worse each time you add an interface. My gatway has 3 internal interfaces and I absolutely detest that I can't use more than 1/3 of the lines download capacity on each of these three networks because of the poor design of Linux traffic shaping. Currently (pre-2.6.16) you can only attach a real traffic shaper to the the output of a device, but why not allow a traffic shaper to be attached to the input of a device, without any of the IMQ/IFB nonsense? I think the problem is that attaching the trafficshaper to the output queue is easy whereas attaching it to the input is hard as there is no queue there to build from, so noone bothered to write it. Luckily we can just upgrade to 2.6.16 at some point and this problem will mostly be solved. > However, there are some cases where IMQ/IFB is useful. I don't want > to bash these intermediary devices, they're just abused too many > times. Well, shaping incoming traffic correctly is exactly what IMQ/IFB was written for, so it's hardly abuse. -- Flemming Frandsen, NrVissing.Net administrator. _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
