From: Stef Coene <stef.coene@docum.org>
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [LARTC] CBQ broken in RedHat 8.0?
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 10:09:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-lartc-103571344114029@msgid-missing> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <marc-lartc-103567646931154@msgid-missing>
On Sunday 27 October 2002 04:10, Robert Davidson wrote:
> When I was playing with wondershaper I ran into this too.
>
> After reviewing the docs I think that the wondershaper merely gives certain
> traffic more bandwidth, but does not prioritize it. The CBQ qdisc does not
> appear to prioritize. If you reduce your uplink rate to less than your
> slowest transfer speed, you should get the results you expect.
>
> I am not sure what it would do for latency - during my testing with VoIP,
> the wondershaper put packets in the right queues, but could not prevent
> computer traffic from hogging the bandwidth.
>
> What would be ideal is a bandwidth limiting CBQ qdisc encapsulating a PRIO
> qdisc. I think that can only be obtained with an HBT qdisc (I would be
> delighted to be corrected!).
It can be done, but I (stil) didn't tried it. If you read the htb pages
carefully, you can get very low delays. To do so, you have to give the class
a lower priority AND you have to be sure you never send more data in the
class then it's rate. (chapter 6 on the htb manual)
I am installing SuSE 8.1 so that I have kernel
> 2.4.19 which I hope will accept the HBT and tc patches (from
> <http://www.docum.org>'s pointer to HBT's home page) better than SuSE 7.3's
> 2.4.10.
Why upgrading your SUSE? You can also download 2.4.19 from ftp.kernel.org and
patch with the lates htb patch ??
> If anyone has sample scripts used for prioritizing VoIP traffic over a VPN
> (or over anything else), I would really appreciate a chance to see what was
> done. The only way I have been able to get good VoIP quality is by reducing
> the bandwidth available to everything else to unacceptably low levels.
I know a lot of people are trying it, but I have no such script.
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/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-27 10:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-26 23:53 [LARTC] CBQ broken in RedHat 8.0? Neil Aggarwal
2002-10-27 3:10 ` Robert Davidson
2002-10-27 10:09 ` Stef Coene [this message]
2002-10-27 17:08 ` Robert Davidson
2002-10-27 17:23 ` David Boreham
2002-10-28 11:40 ` Aigars Mahinovs
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=marc-lartc-103571344114029@msgid-missing \
--to=stef.coene@docum.org \
--cc=lartc@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox