From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 18:31:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 18:30:57 -0400 Received: from petrus.schuldei.org ([195.84.105.112]:43187 "HELO petrus.schuldei.org") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 18:30:11 -0400 Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 00:39:00 +0200 From: Andreas Schuldei To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: artificial latency for a network interface Message-ID: <20010629003900.A6065@sigrid.schuldei.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.17i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org to simulate a sattelite link, I need to add a latency to a network connection. What is the easiest and best way to do that? I wanted to do that using two tun devices. I had hoped to have a routing like this: <-> eth0 <-> tun0 <-> userspace, waiting queue <-> tun1 <-> eth1 I need to do it this way and not with iptables help, because it needs to work also on 2.2.x kernels. Now I started experimenting with the tun0 interfaces and got problems: till now I have not succeeded to get a tun0 interface up. the example code (br_select.c) in the package (as found for example on sourceforge) looks fishy and does not work too well. is it correct that only one /dev/tun file is necessary, but /dev/tun0 and tun1 are opend for reading and writing? I also did not manage to point any routes at tun0 or tun1. thoes interfaces do not show up in the /proc/net/dev either. only the module is loaded. I seem to miss something. who has used those devices before and got them working and could help me debug this?