Re: [LARTC] patch: HTB update for ADSL users

[Ed Wildgoose <lists@wildgooses.com>]

Damion de Soto wrote:

>> After further investigation I think you need the patch a little more 
>> like this for PPPoE and the params you gave (Andy do you think this 
>> looks OK?)  Please let me know if this works for you.
>>
>> (As near as I can tell, there is no PPP overhead(?), and you then 
>> basically encapsulate your packets in IP packets of max size 1492, 
>> with an 8 byte overhead - Perhaps Andy can correct me as to whether 
>> there is still a PPP overhead?)
>
> I wonder if there's any easy way we can get the ATM/PPPoE support enabled
> at runtime.


Yeah, I was thinking of adding a module param in the final version, 
something like "encaps PPPoA" or similar

> I guess a tc option would be needed to enable ADSL (atm) numbers,
> but the HTB qdisc should be able to detect PPP packets for PPPoE, right ?
> at least egress on any pppX interface.


Now that's a very interesting question.  The size is passed in as the 
size of the packet that the kernel sees (including headers).  We mangle 
that to get the size sent over the ATM link.  However, I have ethernet 
on both sides in my setup.  I wonder what the kernel sees if one 
interface is PPP?  Is it already encapsulated in PPP before QOS gets it, 
or not?

> Are you using this patch just for inbound shaping on pppX, or does it 
> still make sense to use it on an IMQ device, or on a LAN-side ethX 
> device to do the equivalent of ingress shaping ?


Use it for both.

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