RE: [LARTC] exploring HTB

[don-lartc@isis.cs3-inc.com (Don Cohen)]

Martin Devera writes:
 > I'm not sure. How balanced tree of classes could help you with big number
 > of filters ? These are unrelated IMHO. When filter determines class number
 > it is looked using hash table.
 > If you use u32 with 200 nodes in tree and htb then classification time
 > will be about 5 steps for each packet...
What do you do if you have 100 rules of form:
 if source ip = ip1 then class1
 if source ip = ip2 then class2
 if source ip = ip3 then class3
 ...
I assume you have to try them until one matches or you run out.

However, I believe that you now support filters at interior classes.
This means that at the top you could do something like
 if source ip in 10.0.0.0 - 10.0.0.50 then class1
 if source ip in 10.0.0.51 - 10.0.0.99 then class2
and then in class1 put filters:
 if source ip in 10.0.0.0 - 10.0.0.25 then class3
 if source ip in 10.0.0.26 - 10.0.0.50 then class3
etc.  Then you'd only have to match o(log(n)) filters.

 > > I don't think this is the problem HTB was meant to solve.
 > > I think what you really want is the (often suggested/requested)
 > > modified version of sfq that hashes only on source or destination
 > > address (depending on whether you use it for the queue going in to or
 > 
 > Right. I think so too :) HTB can be useful in this way if you want
 > different parameters (rate,prio) per host ..
 > But we definitely need the changed sfq. The change is trivial but
 > I'm too deep in new htb just now :(

I can't promise any time soon either.  If someone else wants to work
on this I'd like to send some (reverse engineered) documentation to
include in future sfq - might also help you to make further changes.
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/lartc/