From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <4F994681.9040300@inti.gob.ar> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 09:58:41 -0300 From: gtolon@inti.gob.ar MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20120425.140904.935584797119761625.davem@davemloft.net> <4F985E17.8030309@inti.gob.ar> <27822870.WoBxtuRSLo@sven-laptop.home.narfation.org> In-Reply-To: <27822870.WoBxtuRSLo@sven-laptop.home.narfation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Traffic Control in batman-adv Reply-To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Id: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org Hi Sven, thanks for replying. El 25/04/2012 05:51 p.m., Sven Eckelmann escribi=F3: > On Wednesday 25 April 2012 17:27:03 gtolon@inti.gob.ar wrote: >> Hi, > First thing: Don't reply to random messages when you actually want to sta= rt a > new topic. Ok. >> We are doing some tests with Traffic Control (tc) in routers with >> Openwrt running batman-adv, want to be able to share the bandwidth with >> some degree of fairness between users, so we think that SFQ could help, >> differentiating the flows depending on ip addresses and ports. >> >> The problem is that when adding the SFQ qdisc to the wireless interface >> managed by batman it doesn't work as expected. We tested the SFQ in >> other configurations and it worked fine, in full queues, the dropped >> packets affected the big flows, allowing the others to pass, but in the >> interface managed by batman-adv when packets are dropped, the result >> affects all flows almost equally. We thought this could be related with >> the bridge we use to connect the batman with the non-batman interfaces, >> but in a wireless Acces Point bridged to bat0 it also worked fine. Maybe >> it's related with the way bat0 works with it's managed interface? We'd >> appreciate any advices. Thanks in advance! > Why do you add the sfq qdisc to the wireless device instead to the bat0 > device? It doesn't really makes sense to me. I also tryed with bat0, but the packets continued to dropp on the=20 wireless device, not in bat0, so i thought that the qdisc of bat0 was=20 not being used. Anyway, i'll try again. > Also your statement about "batman-adv bridged with non-batman-adv" doesn't > work, but "batman-adv bridged with non-batman-adv interface" works statem= ent > is slightly irritating. Please explain it a little bit more verbose to he= lp us > understand what is the difference. Sorry for the bad explanation,what i wanted to say is: We have a bridge with bat0, eth0 and wlan0 attached. wlan0 is in ap=20 mode. There's another wireless interface, wlan0-1 in ad-hoc mode,=20 managed by bat0. When SFQ qdisc is applied to wlan0, it works as=20 expected. When it's aplied to wlan0-1, it doesn't. In both cases there's=20 a bridge involved, that=B4s what i was trying to point. I hope now it's=20 more clear. Best regards Gabriel