[LARTC] UPDATE: Re: [LARTC]Some QoS and PPPoE q's...

From: Mattt <mattt@above.nq4u.net>
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [LARTC] UPDATE: Re: [LARTC]Some QoS and PPPoE q's...
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 08:05:42 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-lartc-103328680015890@msgid-missing> (raw)

Small update - I just transposed the Wondershaper from the howto (that I
thought was okay before) into a script - it lasted about 1min :-/

Unfortunately, I forgot to take down the oops message before rebooting
the box...

On Sun, 2002-09-29 at 13:27, Mattt wrote:
> Greetings List'ers :-)
> 
>   Have been playing around with QoS, and have a problem, and some
> questions... Oh yeah, Debian Woody, 2.4.19, 512/128(pppoe).
> 
>   Problem : kernel oops's (sadly, unlogged - though I have a display on
> the router, so could transpose the oops if need be...). Using either
> version of WonderShaper (CBQ), I get a kernel oops - it seems to take a
> little longer with the older version, but mebbe that's co-inkydink... I
> manually entered the script from the lartc howto, and that seemed to be
> okay (tested for about five mins so far, then tried WS1.0, which oops'ed
> in less than 3...). I haven't gotten as far as any link testing yet, but
> things 'feel' different when the shapers are up... I'm using the Debian
> PPPoE package at present, but have built support into the new
> (QoS-enabled) kernel, and will no doubt switch to that (does anyone have
> any comments about the value of such a move?).
> 
>   Question : I have a Billion aDSL modem/router/etc. It has a web
> interface and all manner of other features. This stuff (particualrly the
> interface) are normally sucked through the ethernet (or usb, but we
> don't touch that...) connection to the host. However, I put the modem
> into bridged mode so I could use PPPoE/shaping/netfilter, etc on the
> Linux router, which entails *not* assigning an address to the NIC. Of
> course, this stops me from being able to access the modem's web
> interface. I guess it's hardly that important, given the setup, but it
> would still be nice to be able to at least get to it in case it's ever
> necessary (for a quick test-bench reconfig and back, perhaps...).
> Everything still seems to work when the interface *does* have an IP,
> though - is it okay to have an address on this NIC? Could that be what's
> choking tc (probably not, as it still oops'es the kernel with no address
> on it...). The router in question has three legs - one going to the
> 'secure' local network, one going to the DSL 'modem', and one (two
> transparently bridged NICS) going to the DMZ, in case any of that
> matters.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
>  Mattt                            icq   : 117539757
>  Network and Tech Dood,           www   : above.nq4u.net
>  aboveNetworks.                   
>  mattt@above.nq4u.net             jabber: mattt@jabber.expressnet.net.au
>  
>      What's got four legs and an arm?  A happy Pit Bull...
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
> http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
> 
-- 
Cheers,
 Mattt.                      icq   : 117539757 
 aboveNetworks               www   : www.above.nq4u.net
 mattt@above.nq4u.net        jabber: mattt@jabber.above.nq4u.net

	 What's got four legs and an arm?  A happy Pit Bull...

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