Re: [LARTC] New IMQ device implementation supporting device EOS

[Andy Furniss <andy.furniss@dsl.pipex.com>]

Jiri Fojtasek wrote:
> Roy wrote:
> 
>  >> >seems you  may be unable shape ingress then. what basicaly voids 
> all imq
>  >> >purpose.
>  >> >
>  >>Iam not sure. Every packet comin in in to router must come out !!! So we
>  >>need only shape out trafics. Incoming trafics we cannot shape, only
>  >>police. We cannot change speed and rate of incoming packets !!! have
>  >>look at example includet in my IMQ. There i use the corret way to shape
>  >>incoming and outgoung traffic. BTW: I have writen a TODO ....
>  >
>  >
>  >Here you are completely wrong what makes you think that you cant control
>  >incoming trafic?
>  >some wrong publication on internet?
>  >Almost everybody is doing this and you say not possible, doesnt your isp
>  >control how many packets you receive?
> 
> About what is trafics control ? And how can i control how much packet 
> someone send for me ??? 

You can sort of control TCP from the wrong end of the bottleneck by 
dropping/queueing. It's not perfect but is alot better than nothing. To 
do better you could write an app that manipulates rwin and keeps account 
of the state of each connection so an estimate of what's unstoppably on 
the way can be used to "ease in" new connections. Better still get an 
ISP that will do it on the right end for you - some do.

Andy.

  I can control how much can i send. Anything
> else is waste of time. EXCLUDE of application server where i want 
> control traffic coming in to a specified port, eg sendmail etc. But 
> combining router+traffic controler+application server in to one box is 
> good idea ? No. Because of this its lower priority task for me. A quote 
> from TODO:
> * support for ingress queue ;)
> 
>  >as I know main imq purpose was to control ingress.
> Really ? Iam not sure. Have look in to first original IMQ device driver 
> writen by Martin Devera:
> http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/qos/imq.htm
> 
>  >Ok, enough about this,
>  >I would like to know how stable is your driver, if it shapes localy
>  >generated trafic,
>  >since it was the main problem for imq all time.
>  >if it became stable I will implement your idea in my imq version too.
> 
> Its quite stable. I using it now on two busy routers in my production 
> enviroment (avreage 20 NICs per router, average 70 users, 280 htb 
> classes). Uptime is until kernel upgrade restart (week  ago). localy 
> generated trafic is only DNS and ssh for managment and statistics 
> collection (rrd graphs from Stef Coene, www.docum.org, but the data 
> collections is done by ssh)  Setup scripts i usink like my example but 
> with clasification of the intranet trafics (for this that much htb 
> classes).
> 
> Thanks for the fedback.
> 
> Jiri
> 
> Zkontrolovane antivirusom ClamAv
> Scanned by ClamAv - http://www.clamav.net
> _______________________________________________
> 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/