Re: Re: tc questions
|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
Alejandro Ramos Encinosa wrote:
On Tuesday 10 April 2007 22:11, Andy Furniss wrote:...why? The case I am trying to deal with is an scenario where some traffic goes into 1:20 (something like the traffic from/to the subnet 10.6.70.0/24) and then, I want to shape specifically some other traffic type (for example, the ssh connections from/to subnet 10.6.70.0/24). Is there another way to do it? Please, take a in mind that (in my example) I want to enclose the whole traffic from/to the subnet 10.6.70.0/24 and from that traffic I want to give an special treatment to ssh traffic.Alejandro Ramos Encinosa wrote:tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 1:20 handle 120: sfq perturb 10 tc class add dev eth1 parent 1:20 classid 1:21 htb rate 49mbitThis is a misconfiguration, it doesn't make sense to add sfq and another htb class to 1:20.Andy.Regards, Ale.
You could add two htb classes under 1:20 and give one higher prio, or you could use the prio qdisc. If you really care about latency and have many bulk classes on a slow link then hfsc is better than htb. Linux hfsc could still be improved.
sfq and b/pfifo should be added on leafs, so you could still use them if you created two classes under 1:20.
If you don't specify a qdisc on htb leafs you get pfifo - but the queue length will be chosen from the interface that htb is added to - 1000 for eth (possibly too long) or 3 on ppp/vlan (too short), so it's worth thinking about queue lengths, adding a qdisc and using the limit parameter common to b/pfifo and sfq. (default sfq is 128).
Andy. _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc