From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Aron Brand" Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:19:08 +0000 Subject: [LARTC] Ingress Shaping using IMQ Message-Id: <50F73B338A7FD943B7937BBCF99BFBDE2DB8BC@mail.sofaware.com> MIME-Version: 1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C3DE8E.5F509146" List-Id: To: lartc@vger.kernel.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C3DE8E.5F509146 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Guys, Here is a question that is probably of concern to many of us. I am under pressure to provide some solution for ingress traffic shaping. What my customer demands is to divide the downstream (ingress) of an ADSL lines to two classes of traffic - important traffic and non important downloads. He has a very reasonable requirement: he wants a guarantee of at least 1000kbps at all times for the important traffic on the downstream.=20 Using ingress policing would be the trivial solution. But no says the customer - when the important traffic is not fully utilizing its rate, I want it to share the excess with other classes.=20 After looking around, the answer I found was to use imq, which claims to allow traffic shaping on ingress traffic. So far so good. And now I arrive to the question: It is possible to configure everything in THEORY. The question is, it it really possible for me to give the guarantee that my customer is asking for? I can think of examples why it seems that the answer is no. For example, lets say the ingress line is completely saturated with non-important traffic. How on earth can the poor HTB determine whether important traffic is being drowned out - or there is simply no important traffic? My speculation so far - it is possible to configure these rules, and indeed this is what IMQ was invented for, but in true life there is no solution that works - since it is inherently impossible! Has anyone really created and tested a working ingress traffic shaping solution? Aron ------_=_NextPart_001_01C3DE8E.5F509146 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ingress Shaping using IMQ

Hi = Guys,

Here is = a question that is probably of concern to many of us.

I am = under pressure to provide some solution for ingress traffic shaping. = What my customer demands is to divide the downstream (ingress) of an = ADSL lines to two classes of traffic - important traffic and non = important downloads. He has a very reasonable requirement: he wants a = guarantee of at least 1000kbps at all times for the important traffic on = the downstream.

Using = ingress policing would be the trivial solution. But no says the customer = - when the important traffic is not fully utilizing its rate, I want it = to share the excess with other classes.

After = looking around, the answer I found was to use imq, which claims to allow = traffic shaping on ingress traffic. So far so good.

And now = I arrive to the question: It is possible to configure everything in = THEORY. The question is, it it really possible for me to give the = guarantee that my customer is asking for? I can think of examples why it = seems that the answer is no. For example, lets say the ingress line is = completely saturated with non-important traffic. How on earth can the = poor HTB determine whether important traffic is being drowned out - or = there is simply no important traffic?

My = speculation so far - it is possible to configure these rules, and indeed = this is what IMQ was invented for, but in true life there is no solution = that works - since it is inherently impossible!

Has = anyone really created and tested a working ingress traffic shaping = solution?

Aron


------_=_NextPart_001_01C3DE8E.5F509146-- _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/