Hi,
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 08:37:19 -0700
Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> After a lot of testing, these numbers seem to give me the best
> performance as far as bittorrent download speed.
> How can that be? Is DOWNLINK my upload and UPLINK my download?
Hm, usually not. Are you by chance shaping the internal (i.e. LAN)
interface on a router? Then, of course, it would make sense (except
from the fact that shaping your actual bottle neck, i.e. Internet
connection, would make more sense).
> I tried to define the bittorrent ports as a low priority like this:
> NOPRIOPORTSRC=6881:6999
> NOPRIOPORTDST=6881:6999
>
> but I get this when restarting shorewall:
> Illegal "match"
In the wshaper source, the action happens here (and the same for *DST):
---snip
for a in $NOPRIOPORTSRC
do
tc filter add dev $DEV parent 1: protocol ip prio 15 u32 \
match ip sport $a 0xffff flowid 1:30
done
---snip
In this configuration, it expects a shell-separatable list of ports,
i.e. separated by whitespace. It will create a rule for each one.
The dirty, easy way:
| NOPRIOPORTSRC=$(seq 6881 6999)
| NOPRIOPORTDST=$NOPRIOPORTSRC
But I would rather extend wshaper by another (custom) line and dump your
NOPRIOPORT*-settings.
The syntax is "match ip sport PATTERN MASK". The port of an incoming
packet is AND'ed w/ the MASK and compared to the PATTERN.
e.g. "match ip sport 6880 0xffe0" would match 6880-6911, a further
"match ip sport 6912 0xffc0" would match 6912-6975.
The advantage of this is simply speed/CPU cycles. Alternatively, you
could just use iptables to mark your packets (which probably means even
more precious CPU cycles). The wshaper script, however, doesn't use
iptables.
-hwh
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
