On May 6, 2013, at 1:17 AM, Dan Egli wrote: > *It has some potential, I agree, having looked it over a bit. But the > problem with Wonder Shaper (at least as I understand it) is that it doesn't > restrict anything. Recall that I was looking to restrict certain > ports/services/programs to less than what my bandwidth would be. This was > for multiple reasons, not the least of which is I don't want one system to > dominate the download pipe (or the upload pipe, but downloads are far more > of a worry at this stage). I might look at it again, but I don't recall > seeing anything in the Wonder Shaper scripts that would say, for example, > Bittorrents and HTTP downloads are restricted to 10 mbit/s, meanwhile SSH > and it's related (scp, etc...) can use up the whole bandwidth available to > the NIC.* > > * * > > *Maybe I missed it, and if so I'll go look again. But as my memory works, > Wonder Shaper, nice that it is, isn't what I'm looking for. *
Last time I looked into it, you had to combine a tc command with a separate iptables command to restrict per-port traffic. I've always written it off as too much trouble and gone with a more blunt instrument (per-interface throttling). I was only doing short-term testing, though. I've never used tc for long term traffic shaping. --Dave /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
