Cake - FQ_codel the next generation
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Allan Pinto <allan316@gmail.com>
To: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
Cc: moeller0 <moeller0@gmx.de>, cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Cake] cake separate qos for lan
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 16:06:15 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADH6ZUQqek2RA5ULmO-=YurCv1PRONfTjE+Jjm2DRiqyt5N+Dw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <66A00804-E571-4A44-BE3E-422F78C1F1F7@gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2151 bytes --]

>tc qdisc replace dev imq0 root handle 2: cake raw bandwidth $NONCACHE_RATE
flows
here imq0 should be replaced by ifb0 right?.
i will be testing this tonight and reply with results.

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> > On 27 Mar, 2016, at 11:20, moeller0 <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
> >
> > it might be more future-proof to just use IFBs from the get-go
>
> For this particular use-case, it seems to be more complicated to use IFB
> than IMQ, largely because there is no iptables rule to divert packets
> through an IFB device, and unlike iptables, the CBQ filter mechanism
> doesn’t directly support negative matches of any kind.
>
> However, I think this would work - though it’s completely untested:
>
> ip link set ifb0 up
>
> tc qdisc replace dev ppp0 root handle 1: cake pppoe-vcmux bandwidth
> $FULL_RATE triple-isolate
>
> tc qdisc replace dev imq0 root handle 2: cake raw bandwidth $NONCACHE_RATE
> flows
>
> tc filter replace dev ppp0 protocol ip prio 1 handle 11 u32 match ip src
> $CACHE_IP/32
>
> tc filter replace dev ppp0 protocol ip prio 2 handle 12 u32 action mirred
> egress redirect dev ifb0
>
> The logic of the above is that a positive match is made on the cache
> traffic, but no action is taken.  This terminates filter processing for
> that traffic.  The remaining traffic is redirected unconditionally to the
> IFB device by the second filter rule.
>
> One thing I’m not entirely certain of is whether traffic that has been
> through an IFB device is then requeued in the normal way on the original
> device.  I’d appreciate feedback on whether this system does in fact work.
>
> > I would respectfully recommend to avoid the symbolic overhead parameters
>
> Even if I change their underlying behaviour in the future, it’ll be in a
> way that retains backwards compatibility with all the examples I’ve given
> for the current scheme.  I mostly wanted to raise awareness that the
> overhead compensation system exists for use on encapsulated links.
>
>  - Jonathan Morton
>
>


-- 
Thanx and regd's.

Allan.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2963 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2016-03-28 10:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-03-26 15:14 Allan Pinto
2016-03-26 22:14 ` Jonathan Morton
2016-03-27  5:31   ` Allan Pinto
2016-03-27  7:35     ` Jonathan Morton
2016-03-27  7:42       ` Jonathan Morton
2016-03-27  8:35         ` Allan Pinto
2016-03-27  8:20       ` moeller0
2016-03-28 10:31         ` Jonathan Morton
2016-03-28 10:36           ` Allan Pinto [this message]
2016-03-28 12:09           ` moeller0
2016-03-28 12:25             ` Allan Pinto
2016-03-28 13:06               ` moeller0
2016-03-28 15:04                 ` Allan Pinto
2016-03-28 19:20               ` Jonathan Morton
2016-03-28 21:01                 ` Stephen Hemminger
2016-03-29  5:35                   ` Jonathan Morton
2016-03-29 11:30                     ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2016-03-29 23:31                       ` Dave Taht
2016-03-30  0:16                         ` Dave Taht
2016-03-31 11:49                           ` Allan Pinto
2016-03-31 11:59                             ` Jonathan Morton
2016-03-28 12:02     ` moeller0

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

  List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/cake.lists.bufferbloat.net/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CADH6ZUQqek2RA5ULmO-=YurCv1PRONfTjE+Jjm2DRiqyt5N+Dw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=allan316@gmail.com \
    --cc=cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    --cc=chromatix99@gmail.com \
    --cc=moeller0@gmx.de \
    /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