On 4 Maj, 22:37, Andy Furniss <s...@andyfurniss.entadsl.com> wrote:
> Rafa³ M wrote:
> > Hello,
>
> > tc class add dev ifb0 parent 1:1 classid 1:2 hfsc sc m2 450kbit ul m2
> > 512kbit
> > tc class add dev ifb0 parent 1:1 classid 1:3 hfsc sc m2 62kbit ul m2
> > 512kbit
>
> > why i don't have guaranteed bandwidth 450 and 62? when i set ul m2 450
> > and 62 then bandwidth is splited OK, but when i shutdown downloading
> > 1:2, 1:3 not go to 512
>
> > please help!
>
> I never really used hfsc, I did some tests once and found it's not
> really quite like the hfsc in the sigcom paper in that it relies on
> individual rt classes being backlogged rather than the link, which means
> you can't get it to be packet perfect for slow links, so I kind of gave
> up trying to learn how to configure it, as it seemed like a waste of
> time for shaping on a slow wan, though people who shape lan would
> probably like it the way it is.
>
> To totally contradict myself - depending on setup I think you could make
> it behave better than htb if you have many bulk classes as long as you
> use ls classes - which you should for bulk, not that any of the examples
> I've seen seem to.
>
> If you ever use it on eth rather than ifb remember it will by default
> drop unclassified traffic - so either make a default class or remember
> to tc filter arp.
>
> As for your setup - try without the ul on the leafs but add sc rate
> 512kbit ul rate 512kbit to the parent class 1:1.
>
> Andy.

very thanks