This is a discussion on IFB + HFSC within the Linux Networking forums, part of the Linux Forums category; Hello, tc class add dev ifb0 parent 1:1 classid 1:2 hfsc sc m2 450kbit ul m2 512kbit tc ...
|
|||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
|||
|
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! |
|
|||
|
Rafał 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. |
|
|||
|
On 4 Maj, 22:37, Andy Furniss <s...@andyfurniss.entadsl.com> wrote:
> Rafał 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 |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|