[altq 313] Re: Ingress traffic shaping?

[Karl Pielorz <kpielorz@tdx.co.uk>]

George Uhl wrote:
 
> Just curious, did you try shaping the input traffic using the ALTQ
> traffic conditioner?  It allows you to drop incoming packets
> according to some rules.  It is not a queuing discipline like
> CBQ so you can't borrow bw if it's available.  I notice you
> haven't permitted borrowing on either CBQ class anyway, so
> why not try using the token bucket meter as a traffic shaper?

We did look at that (I presume you mean 'coloring' etc.) - at the moment we do
have a few clases that borrow, and at the time we looked at it, it wasn't
'natively' supported by AltQ (besides the fact it was a little out of my
depth! :)
 
> > My final question is - can anyone see anything "bad" with this set-up? i.e.
> > 'very' inefficient? Likely to cause problems etc?
> >
> 
> Not really.  MRTG would be useful for long-term monitoring of the link.
> It requires some hacking of cbqprobe and cbqmonitor but it could
> payoff.

I now happily have MRTG running off a few ipfw rules that count traffic... :)
- Seems to work pretty well, especially looking at the graphs... For
'realtime' monitoring, we can still use cbqmonitor...

> With MRTG I noted periodic outages of ALTQ CBQ forwarding service
> on a 30Mbps TCP flow over a 24 hour period that K.C's latest patch is
> supposed to fix.

I've just _finally_ gotten time to rebuild with AltQ 2.1 + Patch, we also saw
the same outages running on an fxp0 / 1Mb (shaped), 10Mbs LAN, if the patch
has worked - we'll know literally within the next couple of days <g>
 
-Karl