From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Thomas SPECK" Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 19:59:46 +0000 Subject: Re: [LARTC] Managing Inbound Traffic Message-Id: List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: lartc@vger.kernel.org >Messsage du 10/08/2002 00:10 >De : Wayne de Nobrega >A : >Copie =E0 :=20 >Objet : [LARTC] Managing Inbound Traffic =20 > > I have been playing around with traffic shaping using htb and imq but am > battling to get any control over the inbound traffic. Managing the > outgoing is working perfectly. To manage the inbound internet traffic > which is running on a 64kbit line, I have tried the following including > various permutations of priorities, bursts, and ceilings with no affect. > (Does the ceil option work becuase when I did have it set higher than > the rate, the traffic did not increase even with no other traffic on the > line. I noticed the same thing with the burst option. I cannot place > the shaper at the ISP in this case. > =20 > modprobe imq numdevs=3D1 > =20 > tc qdisc add dev imq0 handle 1: root htb default 1 > tc class add dev imq0 parent 1: classid 1:1 htb rate 64kbit > =20 > tc qdisc add dev imq0 parent 1:1 handle 10: htb default 5 > tc class add dev imq0 parent 10: classid 10:1 htb rate 12kbit burst > 16kbit prio 3 > tc class add dev imq0 parent 10: classid 10:2 htb rate 28kbit burst > 16kbit prio 2 > tc class add dev imq0 parent 10: classid 10:3 htb rate 16kbit burst > 16kbit prio 1 > tc class add dev imq0 parent 10: classid 10:5 htb rate 8kbit prio 4 > =20 > tc qdisc add dev imq0 parent 10:1 handle 21:0 sfq > tc qdisc add dev imq0 parent 10:2 handle 22:0 sfq > tc qdisc add dev imq0 parent 10:3 handle 23:0 sfq > tc qdisc add dev imq0 parent 10:5 handle 24:0 sfq > =20 > tc filter add dev imq0 protocol ip pref 1 parent 10: handle 1 fw classid > 10:1 > tc filter add dev imq0 protocol ip pref 2 parent 10: handle 2 fw classid > 10:2 > tc filter add dev imq0 protocol ip pref 3 parent 10: handle 3 fw classid > 10:3 > =20 > iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -j IMQ > iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -p tcp --sport 20 --dport 1024: > -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j MARK --set-mark 1 > iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -p tcp --sport 80 --dport 1024: > -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j MARK --set-mark 2 > iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -p tcp --sport 22 --dport 1024: > -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j MARK --set-mark 3 I wonder if this is true. Shouldn't one rather use iptables -t mangle -A PR= EROUTING -i eth0 -j IMQ at the end (after the other rules) ? Otherwise ever= yting from eth0 will go right to target IMQ and the other rules are never e= xecuted, i.e. the desired packets are never marked and all the filters are = never true ... -- Thomas _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/