From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Aron Brand" <Aron@sofaware.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 09:14:38 +0000
Subject: RE: [LARTC] virtual interface
Message-Id: <50F73B338A7FD943B7937BBCF99BFBDE2DADBF@mail.sofaware.com>
List-Id: <lartc.vger.kernel.org>
References: <001601c3d348$25749810$b8a14150@dijana>
In-Reply-To: <001601c3d348$25749810$b8a14150@dijana>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org

>Alen,
>
> : can i add HTB rule on virtual interface?
> : example: eth0:0
>
>First, it's not really a virtual interface--it's just a convention from
the old days of IP aliasing to have names like eth0:0.  
> The IP exists and is active on an interface, eth0 in your case.
> The short answer is "no".  Traffic control occurs just prior to the
release of the packet for transmission by the hardware driver.  See the
KPTD [0].
>
> You can however select packets based on many characteristics, so you
may be able to accomplish what you need.  You'll use characteristics
other than the 
> label "eth0:0".

Hi guys,

I have this problem too. I have two Internet routers connected to the
same Ethernet interface (using a hub). And each one obviously needs to
be shaped seperately. It seems like a very common and logical scenario
and this issue seems like a design problem.
Any Ideas on a workaround? Perhaps IMQ can be used somehow (although I
hear it has serious stability problems...)?

Aron

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