From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Boxman Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 19:07:32 +0000 Subject: Re: [LARTC] how flexible is ingress traffic policing to bandwidth limit? Message-Id: <200406081507.33047.jasonb@edseek.com> List-Id: References: <87ekopyk2w.fsf@stark.xeocode.com> In-Reply-To: <87ekopyk2w.fsf@stark.xeocode.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: lartc@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 08 June 2004 14:35, Greg Stark wrote: > [I sent this earlier but I guess the list is subscriber-only?] > > I just set up wondershaper, it has a simple filter on the downstream > direction to limit the bandwidth usage: > > tc qdisc add dev $DEV handle ffff: ingress > tc filter add dev $DEV parent ffff: protocol ip prio 50 u32 match ip src \ > 0.0.0.0/0 police rate ${DOWNLINK}kbit burst 10k drop flowid :1 > > This is effective but is there any way to tell it to choose only certain > kinds of streams for dropping packets? Minimally I would want to tell it to > never drop any packets in a certain list of port numbers. ingress is rather weak. You can only really police with it. For what you want most people setup the IMQ[1] device and you egress filters on it to control what is shaped and how. [1] http://trash.net/~kaber/imq/ _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/