From: Andrew Beverley <andy@andybev.com>
To: "John A. Sullivan III" <jsullivan@opensourcedevel.com>
Cc: Lloyd Standish <lloyd@crnatural.net>,
"netfilter@vger.kernel.org" <netfilter@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: prio + policing filter on ingress?
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 20:13:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1323893613.1995.152.camel@andybev-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1323816812.8451.3.camel@denise.theartistscloset.com>
On Tue, 2011-12-13 at 17:53 -0500, John A. Sullivan III wrote:
> > > Now, my friend wants to be able to make personal use of the UNUSED
> > > bandwidth without infringing on his customers' paid bandwidth. So I
> > > got the idea of putting all traffic to his IP (192.168.0.5 in my
> > > example) into band 3 of a prio qdisc.
> >
> > For you to do *exactly* what you describe, I think you'd have to use the
> > prio qdisc. And as you have found, it's quite limited. You could attach
> > a TBF qdisc to each leaf class to rate limit, but as you have already
> > alluded, this would not give an overall rate limit.
Well according to a question just posted to the (new) LARTC mailing
list, you can use HTB with a prio attached to one of the leafs. You
could try that. I.e. have a single HTB leaf, with a prio below it. The
HTB leaf will throttle your traffic, but I guess that the prio will
allow any demand on that throttled link to be prioritised, which will
then draw on the class above it as appropriate. Something like:
tc qdisc add dev ifb0 root handle 1 htb default 5000 r2q 6
tc class add dev ifb0 parent 1: classid 1:3 htb rate 100Mbit
tc qdisc add dev ifb0 parent 1:3 handle 5000 prio
> <snip>
> HFSC might not be a bad idea for you. I'm still trying to get my head
> around it
Ah yes, I've noticed the questions on the netdev list. Thanks for that -
I just need to spend some time reading through the details now!
Andy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-14 20:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-12 15:27 prio + policing filter on ingress? Lloyd Standish
2011-12-13 18:25 ` Andrew Beverley
2011-12-13 20:19 ` Lloyd Standish
2011-12-13 21:51 ` Andrew Beverley
2011-12-13 22:53 ` John A. Sullivan III
2011-12-14 20:13 ` Andrew Beverley [this message]
2011-12-15 20:48 ` Andy Furniss
2011-12-15 21:29 ` John A. Sullivan III
2011-12-15 22:08 ` Andy Furniss
2011-12-19 9:53 ` Andrew Beverley
2011-12-19 11:25 ` LARTC mailing list [was: Re: prio + policing filter on ingress?] Niccolò Belli
2011-12-19 17:07 ` John A. Sullivan III
2011-12-19 17:11 ` Andrew Beverley
2011-12-19 19:59 ` LARTC mailing list David Miller
2011-12-19 20:59 ` Niccolò Belli
2011-12-20 10:45 ` Andy Furniss
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=1323893613.1995.152.camel@andybev-desktop \
--to=andy@andybev.com \
--cc=jsullivan@opensourcedevel.com \
--cc=lloyd@crnatural.net \
--cc=netfilter@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).