Re: [Shorewall-users] traffic shaping peculiarities

On Apr 30, 2011, at 3:44 PM, Mr Dash Four wrote:

>
>> I am trying to reshape my traffic shaping and am getting nowhere fast!
>> Here is what happens during shorewall compile:
>>
>> 1.
>> eth0 - 1mbit classify,hfsc
>> ifb0 - 1mbit - eth0 (the above 2 lines are from tcdevices)
>> ifb0:21 - 10*full/100:50ms 20*full/100 1 tcp-ack (tcclasses)
>> ERROR: Invalid RATE (10*full/100:50ms) : /etc/shorewall/tcclasses

You didn't specify hfsc on ifb0; therefore, HTB does not accept the syntax you have used for the guaranteed rate.

>>
>> 2.
>> eth0 - 1mbit classify,hfsc (tcdevices)
>> eth0:1 - 10*full/100:50ms 20*full/100 1 tcp-ack (tcclases)
>> ERROR: Duplicate interface:class number (1:1} : /etc/shorewall/tcclasses
>>
>> 3.
>> 123:eth0 - 1mbit classify,hfsc (tcdevices)
>> 123:1 - 10*full/100:50ms 20*full/100 1 tcp-ack (tcclasses)
>> ERROR: Duplicate interface:class number (291:1} :
>> /etc/shorewall/tcclasses

I should make it more clear that '1' is a poor choice of class number, given that '1' is the class number assigned to the root class of each interface.

>>
>> 4.
>> A:eth0 - 1mbit classify,hfsc (tcdevices)

That syntax is completely wacky. What piece of the documentation led you to that one?

>> A:1 - 10*full/100:50ms 20*full/100 1 tcp-ack (tcclasses)
>> ERROR: Unknown INTERFACE (A) : /etc/shorewall/tcclasses
>>
>>
>> Am I missing something because I cannot find any "duplicate
>> interface:class number" anywhere?

See above.

>>
>> Also, in the latest version (.19.1) with "man shorewall.conf" -
>> USE_ACTIONS is not explained anywhere, but is referred to in various
>> places (I presume USE_ACTIONS has been deprecated, but the
>> documentation has not been updated).
> One other thing I forgot: the whole section of "man shorewall-tcrules"
> where it describes the use of the ":{C[F|P|T|I]} flags is part of item 1
> (where the mark value help is), but it should be at the very end of that
> section (as item 9 perhaps) as I could have "major:minor:T" for example
> (which has nothing to do with the mark value as described in item 1).
>
> That is, of course, if my understanding of the syntax of that field is
> correct. That syntax, by the way, is also shown wrong - the
> "MARK/CLASSIFY" syntax should be ending with "[:{C[F|P|T|I]}]" and not,
> as indicated in that man page, with "[:{C|F|P|T|CF|CP|CT|I:CI}]" - just
> thought to mention that.
>

Thanks,

-Tom

Tom Eastep \ When I die, I want to go like my Grandfather who
Shoreline, \ died peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming like
Washington, USA \ all of the passengers in his car
http://shorewall.net \________________________________________________

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software
The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network
management toolset available today. Delivers lowest initial
acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd

_______________________________________________
Shorewall-users mailing list
Shorewall-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users

• This message: [ Message body ]
• Previous message: Mr Dash Four: "Re: [Shorewall-users] traffic shaping peculiarities"
• In reply to: Mr Dash Four: "Re: [Shorewall-users] traffic shaping peculiarities"

• Contemporary messages sorted: [ By Date ] [ By Thread ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ]