On Mon, June 5, 2006 6:00 pm, Chris GM wrote: > Hello Plug, > > > Anybody tried the difference between CBQ and HTB for linux traffic > shaping? > > > Chris > _________________________________________________ > Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List > [email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Read the Guidelines: > http://linux.org.ph/lists > Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
i prepared HTB over CBQ... more flexible.... i tried it and its cool... tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: htb default 110 tc class add dev eth0 parent 1:0 classid 1:1 htb rate 512kbit tc class add dev eth0 parent 1:1 classid 1:10 htb rate 128kbit ceil 512kbit tc class add dev eth0 parent 1:1 classid 1:20 htb rate 128kbit ceil 512kbit tc class add dev eth0 parent 1:1 classid 1:30 htb rate 256kbit ceil 512kbit tc qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:10 handle 10: sfq perturb 10 tc qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:10 handle 20: sfq perturb 10 tc qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:10 handle 30: sfq perturb 10 i simple yet effective traffic shaping structure you have a gurranted 128kbit for class 1:10 and 1:20 and a max of 512kbit if there still available bandwidth HTB lower class can borrow from there upper class and add SFQ for pair treatment of traffic... wowoweee... ------------------------------------ Philcopy Corporation 793 J.P. Rizal Ave. Makati City Tel# 899-8421 Fax# 890-5940 http://www.philcopy.net ------------------------------------ _________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
