From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Clouter Subject: Re: shape traffic on tun interfaces Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 11:27:12 +0100 Message-ID: <0pufi7-0ii.ln1@chipmunk.wormnet.eu> References: <301941280614170@web105.yandex.ru> Cc: lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl To: netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:59865 "EHLO lo.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751142Ab0HALIS (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Aug 2010 07:08:18 -0400 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OfWOv-0004AG-P6 for netdev@vger.kernel.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 13:08:17 +0200 Received: from chipmunk.wormnet.eu ([195.195.131.226]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 13:08:17 +0200 Received: from alex by chipmunk.wormnet.eu with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 13:08:17 +0200 Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Franchoze Eric wrote: > > Do we have any interface to shape traffic per destination IP? The > standrad HTB shapes it per device, which is not suitable for case if > limitation required per destination IP. For example openvpn server > which servers about 3000 clients and has 10 internal tun interfases > (tun0-tun9). > Do the QoS on your next hop router or on the interface all your de-encapsulated VPN traffic flows over (ie. 'eth0') instead. Cheers -- Alexander Clouter .sigmonster says: He who always plows a straight furrow is in a rut.