>Try protocol 8021q or whatever its number is - if there are other
>protocol filters you will need a different prio or you will get an error.
I'll try that. I hav just seem some older stuff on the VLAN mailing list which might do what I want. I'm still investigating.
>Are these wireless customers?
Nup. Well, not directly. This is going on our backbone, so I'm not taking traffic straight off the wireless. Ultimately, it will be delivered to a customer over a wireless link, but there's lots of ethernet between the QOS box and the wireless.
By the way, wireless != 802.11, there's plenty of other flavours which all taste just like ethernet.
> I wonder if htb tweaked/untweaked/hfsc/policers could be better than cbq
At this point I'm not locked into any particular discipline, but cbq looked like it would do what I wanted. I'll look a little further into the other possibilities.
Regards,
Leigh
Leigh Sharpe
Network Systems Engineer
Pacific Wireless
Ph +61 3 9584 8966
Mob 0408 009 502
Helpdesk 1300 300 616
email lsharpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
web www.pacificwireless.com.au
-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Furniss [mailto:lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 12:33 PM
To: Leigh Sharpe
Cc: lartc
Subject: Re: RE: IFB setup was no subject
Leigh Sharpe wrote:
> Seems that the example I gave actually works, but not the way I'm using it.
> I am bridging VLAN tagged packets,
Try protocol 8021q or whatever its number is - if there are other
protocol filters you will need a different prio or you will get an error.
but for some reason they are not being subjected to the rate limit. If I
pass normal, untagged packets through this setup, it behaves as
expected. However, once I put tagged packets through the bridge, it
fails to shape traffic.
> I don't want to have to use VLAN sub-interfaces, because the VLAN code strips the 802.1q tag from packets before they can be examined, which causes me problems in other areas.
Are these wireless customers?
I've never shaped wireless - do you get alot of extra loss from link
layer, what's the bandwidth, single duplex or is it round robin type?
I wonder if htb tweaked/untweaked/hfsc/policers could be better than cbq
- you may be able to get things better for link latyer, tcpdumps will
show you how bursty things are for users.
Andy.
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
