From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Santiago J. R=?ISO-8859-1?B?dWFubyBSaW5j824=?=" Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 21:22:06 +0000 Subject: Re: [LARTC] Fair bandwidth oversubscribing ? How with HTB ? Message-Id: <1074633726.400d9bfec0223@webmail.avatar.com.co> List-Id: References: <1187.202.49.246.211.1074629494.squirrel@webmail.igrin.co.nz> In-Reply-To: <1187.202.49.246.211.1074629494.squirrel@webmail.igrin.co.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: lartc@vger.kernel.org try HFSC, Hierarchical Fair Service Curve: http://trash.net/~kaber/hfsc http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~hzhang/HFSC/ i'm going to test it in this week. Quoting Simon Byrnand : > Hopefully someone has a suggestion on how I might do this...as I can't > figure it out :( >=20 > I need to be able to set up a group of seperate users who have a > "bandwidth pool" they share, but also be able to limit their individual > bandwidth as well. >=20 > Example: >=20 > I have 5 customers and would like to be able to provide them with a > maximum of 256Kbit each, with a CIR of 33%. >=20 > To do this, I'd like the 5 customers to share a parent group which is > therefore limited to 426Kbit, Which is 5*256Kbit/3. >=20 > The idea being that individual customers can achieve up to a maximum of > 256Kbit provided that the total group pool doesn't exceed 426Kbit, and if > the total group pool maxes out, then each customer should get reduced > bandwidth in fair ratios based on their individual maximum setting. > (Currently 256Kbit for all of them, but I'd like to be able to > differentiate them later) >=20 > If all 5 were trying to fully utilize their bandwidth at the same time, > they should get a fairly distributed 33% of their maximum - eg about > 85Kbit. >=20 > The problem I can see is that both CBQ and HTB don't seem to honour > situations where the sum of all the child rates exceeds the parent rate - > the parent rate is ignored so the 426Kbit cap is exceeded. The HTB docs > even explicitely say this won't work. >=20 > So is there any tricky way to do this with slightly different semantics ? > Surely there must be some way :-) I've spent many long hours studying CBQ > and trying things out and finally came to the conclusion that CBQ alone > just can't do it, but I was hoping HTB could, but thus far I've been > unsuccessful here too.. >=20 > Currently I'm using CBQ but I'm limited in that the individual maximum > speeds can only equal the parent group maximum bandwidth which is workable > for a few customers, but not very satisfactory and not flexible enough as > I add more customers. >=20 > If someone could point me in the right direction or just give me a firm > "nope, can't be done" that would be great.... >=20 > I'd also like to enable short term bursting over and above this as well, > to improve responsiveness during downloading, say, 33% overbandwidth for 5 > seconds, that sort of thing, but I'll cross that bridge when (if) I get to > it...(any comments here on how effective enabling bursting is for reducing > the dreaded unresponsiveness-during-downloads problem would be welcome > too) >=20 > Regards, > Simon >=20 > _______________________________________________ > LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl > http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ >=20 Santiago J. Ruano Rinc=F3n Avatar Ltda. ParqueSoft Popay=E1n +57-2 8221214 _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/