From: Andrew Beverley <andy@andybev.com>
To: "John A. Sullivan III" <jsullivan@opensourcedevel.com>
Cc: Lloyd Standish <lloyd@crnatural.net>,
"netfilter@vger.kernel.org" <netfilter@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: prio + policing filter on ingress?
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 20:13:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1323893613.1995.152.camel@andybev-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1323816812.8451.3.camel@denise.theartistscloset.com>
On Tue, 2011-12-13 at 17:53 -0500, John A. Sullivan III wrote:
> > > Now, my friend wants to be able to make personal use of the UNUSED
> > > bandwidth without infringing on his customers' paid bandwidth. So I
> > > got the idea of putting all traffic to his IP (192.168.0.5 in my
> > > example) into band 3 of a prio qdisc.
> >
> > For you to do *exactly* what you describe, I think you'd have to use the
> > prio qdisc. And as you have found, it's quite limited. You could attach
> > a TBF qdisc to each leaf class to rate limit, but as you have already
> > alluded, this would not give an overall rate limit.
Well according to a question just posted to the (new) LARTC mailing
list, you can use HTB with a prio attached to one of the leafs. You
could try that. I.e. have a single HTB leaf, with a prio below it. The
HTB leaf will throttle your traffic, but I guess that the prio will
allow any demand on that throttled link to be prioritised, which will
then draw on the class above it as appropriate. Something like:
tc qdisc add dev ifb0 root handle 1 htb default 5000 r2q 6
tc class add dev ifb0 parent 1: classid 1:3 htb rate 100Mbit
tc qdisc add dev ifb0 parent 1:3 handle 5000 prio
> <snip>
> HFSC might not be a bad idea for you. I'm still trying to get my head
> around it
Ah yes, I've noticed the questions on the netdev list. Thanks for that -
I just need to spend some time reading through the details now!
Andy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-14 20:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-12 15:27 prio + policing filter on ingress? Lloyd Standish
2011-12-13 18:25 ` Andrew Beverley
2011-12-13 20:19 ` Lloyd Standish
2011-12-13 21:51 ` Andrew Beverley
2011-12-13 22:53 ` John A. Sullivan III
2011-12-14 20:13 ` Andrew Beverley [this message]
2011-12-15 20:48 ` Andy Furniss
2011-12-15 21:29 ` John A. Sullivan III
2011-12-15 22:08 ` Andy Furniss
2011-12-19 9:53 ` Andrew Beverley
2011-12-19 11:25 ` LARTC mailing list [was: Re: prio + policing filter on ingress?] Niccolò Belli
2011-12-19 17:07 ` John A. Sullivan III
2011-12-19 17:11 ` Andrew Beverley
2011-12-19 19:59 ` LARTC mailing list David Miller
2011-12-19 20:59 ` Niccolò Belli
2011-12-20 10:45 ` Andy Furniss
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1323893613.1995.152.camel@andybev-desktop \
--to=andy@andybev.com \
--cc=jsullivan@opensourcedevel.com \
--cc=lloyd@crnatural.net \
--cc=netfilter@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.