All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Simon Oosthoek <simon.oosthoek@ti-wmc.nl>
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [LARTC] ingress policing based on source address?
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 12:15:48 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4087B774.4040404@ti-wmc.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4087B4C8.6010008@ti-wmc.nl>

Hi all

I'm new to this list, but not exactly to iproute stuff.

I'd like to solve a specific problem with bandwidth coming from
different external sources towards the internal network (also the other
way around, but I figure that's not so much a problem, since that is
egress traffic shaping).

The network looks like this:

internet ------ ISP-------[shaping/router]
  |                |                +-   net1 -------- host1
mirrors          host2              +-   net2

in text: we connect to the internet via an ISP, where we also have an
externally accessible host (host2). Internally we use NAT and several
subnets.

We have a 100Mbit/s connection to the ISP, but we only pay for 1Mbit/s.
So in order to keep our traffic within the agreed parameters, we need to
police our incoming and outgoing traffic. However the traffic from and
to the ISP and host2 doesn't have to be policed.

For our external traffic there's not much problem to shape the traffic
in the egress queues (using HTB and TBF/SFQ stuff). This is well
described in the LARTC howto documentation.

My problem is with the incoming traffic. The examples in the howto don't
go very much into this and from what I understand the ingress queue is
much less advanced than the egress queue. I read something about an
intermediate queue, but I don't understand how that works (yet).

My question is whether this is something I can do using the ingress
queue, somehow defining filter rules with different queue associated
with that, or whether someone has experience with a similar configuration.

If this is not possible, I might be able to solve it differently by
adding another host with just 2 interfaces and using only egress queues,
but I'd prefer limiting my solution to a single host.

Thanks in advance

Simon

PS, if this is the second time you get this message, I was too impatient 
and sent the first one before my confirmation was in....
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

  reply	other threads:[~2004-04-22 12:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-04-22 12:04 [LARTC] ingress policing based on source address? Simon Oosthoek
2004-04-22 12:15 ` Simon Oosthoek [this message]
2004-04-23 23:33 ` 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=4087B774.4040404@ti-wmc.nl \
    --to=simon.oosthoek@ti-wmc.nl \
    --cc=lartc@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.