From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jamal Subject: Re: traffic shaping with NAT: IFB as IMQ replacement? Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 08:33:26 -0400 Message-ID: <1175258006.4879.5.camel@localhost> References: <1175184716.4881.30.camel@localhost> <200703300108.01994.gerd@egidy.de> Reply-To: hadi@cyberus.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jens Thiele , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linuximq@yahoogroups.com To: "Gerd v. Egidy" Return-path: Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.227]:21987 "EHLO wx-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750837AbXC3Mdc (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Mar 2007 08:33:32 -0400 Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id h31so511239wxd for ; Fri, 30 Mar 2007 05:33:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <200703300108.01994.gerd@egidy.de> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2007-30-03 at 01:08 +0200, Gerd v. Egidy wrote: > I'm also interested in shaping NAT. Would you mind telling us what you have in > mind with your userspace code? Do you plan something like > > tun -> your userspace code -> tun > ^ > | (netlink) > v > conntrack > Conntrack is already a perfomance hog - so using user space in that manner is sinful. The idea is to use contrack netlink to setup tc rules with ifb. In any case, if you are interested talk to me privately; i have received a few emails since i posted but mostly for people who want to test. If you are in that category please just keep pinging me and i will feel guilty and get it done. cheers, jamal