Re: RV: [LARTC] Re: My 1st BW Manager

[Stef Coene <stef.coene@docum.org>]

On Monday 21 April 2003 05:12, rio@martin.mu wrote:
> Original Message:
> -----------------
> From: Martin A. Brown mabrown-lartc@securepipe.com
>
> >I would suggest the following configuration (as Stef has proposed):
> > 128kbit ceil 128kbit    +---- rate 32kbit ceil 128kbit <-- 192.168.1.1
> >
> >         +---------------+---- rate 32kbit ceil 128kbit <-- 192.168.1.2
> >
> >                         +---- rate 32kbit ceil 128kbit <-- 192.168.1.3
> >
> >                         +---- rate 32kbit ceil 128kbit <-- 192.168.1.4
> >Now, you have four different classes, one for each IP.  Each IP is
> >guaranteed 128kbit.  Each IP can consume up to 128kbit, if there isn't
> >competition with other classes.
>
> Dear Martin,
> I ve implemented before just exactly as you have described above, but the
> main problem was when some host, 192.168.1.4 for example, use DAP that open
> about 10 tcp streams, that host will get 128Kbit maximum when the other
> hosts in idle connection. But as soon as other host up and request for
> bandwidth, 192.168.1.4 wont decrease the speed of download into 32Kbit. I
> wonder why this is happened ?
If you have 2 active userx, each user should get 50% so 64 kbit.
I don't understand why this is not happening.  I created 2 class with each 50% 
of the bandwidth.  I had 5 tcp streams in 1 class so that class uses 100% of 
the bandwidth.  The moment I started a tcp stream in the other class, that 
class got 50% like expected.  So it works in my test setup.


Are you sure your filters are working?  And how do you monitor the classes?  

Stef

-- 

stef.coene@docum.org
 "Using Linux as bandwidth manager"
     http://www.docum.org/
     #lartc @ irc.oftc.net

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