On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 04:58:19PM +0100, Peter Surda wrote:
> I hope people won't mind if I mention my project again:
> http://www.shurdix.org
We're happy to receive any reply at all, really... :-)
> Your situation is however special because you have squid. Combining
> squid and tc is problematic.
I agree; so far I haven't been able to shape squid traffic
the way I want it to. However, shouldn't rshaper suffer from the
same issues? It should at least be possible to do something
similar to rshaper using tc.
> However, there were some kind guys who designed the "tproxy" iptables
> extension, which can help you. It isn't easy to setup and if you have
> NAT you need 2 separate machines (one doing the NAT and one running
> the squid), but is doable. This way tc will see squid's traffic with
> the IP of the real client.
These are about the most interesting lines I've seen on this topic.
However, I'm in a small home network situation, so even having just
one dedicated linux machine is luxury. So any solution that requires
separate machines is not feasible for me.
> My recommendation for your situation would be something like this:
> - keep your router, let it do NAT and perhaps a minimal firewall
> - get a second machine, put it between the router and the LAN, and
> install shurdix there
> - configure it to use TC and Squid (and optionally IP accounting and/or
> firewall if you like). No delay pools necessary.
Other possibilities are:
- Never touch a running system. (If it works, why not leave as is?)
- Find out how exactly rshaper limits and/or distributes
up- and download bandwidth for
* User <-> Internet
* User <-> User
* Internet <-> Squid (and other caches, DNS etc.)
* Squid (and others?) <-> User
and use this information to build a tc class tree.
- If you want to keep rshaper, port it to 2.6 by yourself ;-)
Regards,
Andreas Klauer
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
