[LARTC] IMQ problems :-(

[LARTC] IMQ problems :-(

[Robert Walker]

Hi

I have built a custom TMB Mandrake kernel (2.4.22) with IMQ and ESFQ
support. I statically compiled both (mistake?) ESFQ is sorted and
working fine (I have succesfully patched IPROUTE2).

I have got to the stage where I can see the IMQ device as UP with ifconfig.
I can use TC to add QDISCs to the IMQ device. However I just cannot sort out
IPTABLES to actually redirect packets to the IMQ device!! I have been trying
for weeks to sort this problem out and its really helping to develop
my Linux Zen awareness...

Currently I am trying to patch iptables-1.2.8 with iptables-1.2.7a IMQ
patch. I am not getting a .d dependency file for the lipipt_IMQ.c file
in the iptables - extensions directory. I think this is because the
IMQ patch looks for an ipt_IMQ.c file in directory
.../net/ipv4/netfilter/ in my kernel sources. But my kernel source
doesn't have this file. This is the common problem for all the older iptables
-IMQ patches I have tried.

Why don't I have this file in my kernel sources? Is it because I
statically linked in supported for IMQ into the kernel? Do I need to
recompile the kernel with IMQ selected as a module??

I am very new to Linux so these patches for this and patches for that
plus something called 'patch-o-matic' are all getting a bit....

Yours in patchyness...

Robert


_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

Re: [LARTC] IMQ problems :-(

[Roy]

Imq is very invasive componemt which requires to recompile almost everyhing
this diver is very unstable and will crash for sure, sooner or later
depending on load.

I sugest you to leave iptables alone and just modify imq.c source to catch
what you need.
ir you dont have too much trafic it may not crash for all day. ( if you will
use it for download shaping)

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

Re: [LARTC] IMQ problems :-(

[Robert Walker]

Hi Roy,

Thanks for getting back to me so promptly.

> Imq is very invasive componemt which requires to recompile almost everyhing
> this diver is very unstable and will crash for sure, sooner or later
> depending on load.

I have read about people having lots of problems with IMQ. So I just wanted to
try it and see how stable it is on my box. I gather it could actually
be problems with the Kernel and not the IMQ code??

> I sugest you to leave iptables alone and just modify imq.c source to catch
> what you need.
> ir you dont have too much trafic it may not crash for all day. ( if you will
> use it for download shaping)

I think that sounds even more messy :-)
I only wanted to ingress shape with IMQ to ensure that I don't drop UDP
or small TCP ACK packets for upload streams. I guess I will just give
up on the idea and using ingress policing... Its not so important anyway as my
DSL connection is very asymetric (2mbit D/L & 256kbit U/L) and upload
shaping is more important.

Even if IMQ is fixed in kernel 2.6 (is it??) I won't be able to use it until I
can update the driver for my conexant PCI ADSL modem (which works fine
just now under kernel 2.4.22)....

-- 
Best regards,
 Robert


_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

Re: [LARTC] IMQ problems :-(

[Roy]

> I have read about people having lots of problems with IMQ. So I just
wanted to
> try it and see how stable it is on my box. I gather it could actually
> be problems with the Kernel and not the IMQ code??
>
That is possible but prpbably not because of bug in kernel I
as I think it is because kernel handles local trafic diferently than
forwarded

so you cant use imq to shape trafic generated by server
I am comtinuing development of imq abd I face this problem most of the time.

> I think that sounds even more messy :-)
> I only wanted to ingress shape with IMQ to ensure that I don't drop UDP
> or small TCP ACK packets for upload streams. I guess I will just give
> up on the idea and using ingress policing... Its not so important anyway
as my
> DSL connection is very asymetric (2mbit D/L; 256kbit U/L) and upload
> shaping is more important.
>
if only want to shape incoming trafic probably you can use imq quite safely,

anyway as I see you dont need it at all you can easily shape all uploads
anyway
and since your download speed is high enough you dont need to worry about
it.

however imq can be usefull to control trafic so that you can download with
kaza and browse web or play game without high latency.


_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

Re: [LARTC] IMQ problems :-(

[Andy Furniss]

On Sunday 04 January 2004  5:33 pm, Roy wrote:
> > I have read about people having lots of problems with IMQ. So I just
>
> wanted to
>
> > try it and see how stable it is on my box. I gather it could actually
> > be problems with the Kernel and not the IMQ code??
>
> That is possible but prpbably not because of bug in kernel I
> as I think it is because kernel handles local trafic diferently than
> forwarded
>
> so you cant use imq to shape trafic generated by server
> I am comtinuing development of imq abd I face this problem most of the
> time.


Do you mean because it crashes ?

I seem to be able to shape upstream from my gateway and forward OK using 
IMQ - I know I don't really need it for up because I could mark, and the 
nat patch only works down, but I've been testing the jdg script recently 
and haven't managed a crash yet. I am only on a home network that gets 
shutdown after 18 hours, though.


>
> > I think that sounds even more messy :-)
> > I only wanted to ingress shape with IMQ to ensure that I don't drop
> > UDP or small TCP ACK packets for upload streams. I guess I will just
> > give up on the idea and using ingress policing... Its not so important
> > anyway
>
> as my
>
> > DSL connection is very asymetric (2mbit D/L; 256kbit U/L) and upload
> > shaping is more important.
>
> if only want to shape incoming trafic probably you can use imq quite
> safely,
>
> anyway as I see you dont need it at all you can easily shape all uploads
> anyway
> and since your download speed is high enough you dont need to worry
> about it.
>
> however imq can be usefull to control trafic so that you can download
> with kaza and browse web or play game without high latency.
______________________________________________
> LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
> http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/