From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Denys" Subject: Re: HFSC dangerous behaviour (not a bug) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 13:45:26 +0200 Message-ID: <20071029114405.M87941@visp.net.lb> References: <20071028235224.M3269@visp.net.lb> <4725BC23.7000907@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Patrick McHardy Return-path: Received: from usermail.globalproof.net ([194.146.153.18]:58246 "EHLO usermail.globalproof.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752691AbXJ2Lpt (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Oct 2007 07:45:49 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4725BC23.7000907@trash.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org After thinking about that, i can say only thanks. I like your idea, and it is better to avoid mistakes and missed traffic, then have a lot of complaints from users "why my shaper not working well". And seems i will try to switch to HFSC. Thanks for explanation. On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 11:55:31 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote > Denys wrote: > > Hi All > > > > During testing i found very strange thing. > > After applying even example shaper: > > http://linux-ip.net/tc/hfsc.en/ > > ------------- > > [...] > > --------------- > > I had all traffic on eth0 stopped. Tried on br0 - same result. Even ARP > > becoming non-functional. > > > > After specifying correct default class everything worked fine. > > > > In HTB if you dont specify default class, traffic just pass without > > "shaping". > > HFSC drops unclassified packets. If you don't classify ARP properly, > things will break, > > > Is it possible to keep same behaviour on both disciplines? > > Probably just dropping all traffic not good idea, cause if user working on > > remote box by forgetting specifying default class or by mistake using > > incorrect class number he will loose access to the box, if same interface is > > used for tests on shaping and access. > > In same time it is good, and can show accurate results on shaping, without > > bypassing some "forgotten" traffic. > > But at least it must be same, IMHO, on HTB and HFSC. > > This came up a couple of times already. I don't like HTB's behaviour > since you don't notice when your classifiers are incomplete. So I'm > against changing HFSC to behave similar. HTB OTOH can't be changed > since users probably rely on that, not classifying ARP is a common > mistake. > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Denys Fedoryshchenko Technical Manager Virtual ISP S.A.L.