Re: TCP/IP UDP priority
On Sun, 28 Jun 1998, Richard Sharpe wrote: priority than the HTTP packets, however, this depends on both the routers handling the TOS field correctly (which Ciscos do, I believe) and the PPP server doing likewise, and I am not convinced that the Linux based ones do that, but Cisco 5260s may do the right thing. An inspection of the source seems to indicate that Linux does in fact treat packets according to their priority, although the treatment is not terribly advanced, it does appear to. However I do not know what other servers may or may not pay attention to this sort of thing. But I think that the original poster wouldn't have posted, if this basic facility were good enough for him. :) -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
RE: TCP/IP UDP priority
First of all, many thanks for the responses. Well, I think I have a theoretical solution. Situation: I am happy ftp'ing a big new kernel.tar.gz from ftp.kernel.org. What happens is, ftp.kernel.org send me the data of the kernel.tar.gz in big packets. I ( actually my PC) receive this data and respond to ftp.kernel.org to let this server now it received the data. This is how tcp/ip works. Every packet gets a confirmation. The solution: If I could somehow make my PC wait 'a few seconds, but not to long' before responding to the server, the throughput would drop. Because the server has to wait for the confirmation before sending the next packet. But I think this is kernel hacking stuff, and thats way to difficult for my simple brain. I think I am going to read ipfwchains HOWTO, and install a v2.2 kernel, and take a look at the TOS field. Comments are welcome, Wim -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
RE: TCP/IP UDP priority
On Mon, 29 Jun 1998, Wim Raets wrote: The solution: If I could somehow make my PC wait 'a few seconds, but not to long' before responding to the server, the throughput would drop. Because the server has to wait for the confirmation before sending the next packet. This is probably a bad solution. If the server does not hear from you quickly enough, it resends the packet, assuming it got lost or mangled somewhere along the way. Therefore a solution like you propose, while it would be able to adjust throughputs, would mostly lower your total bandwidth, not reallocate it. So it is probably not what you want. -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: TCP/IP UDP priority
On Sat, 27 Jun 1998, Richard Sharpe wrote: I talk about how FTP typically sets the HIGH THROUGPUT TOS, and others (like Telnet) set the LOW DELAY TOS. And I mention that modern routers handled packets in the queue based on the TOS flags, and that I suspect that Linux can even do that. There's been a lot of talk on this subject and I'd like to clarify my standpoint. What I'm saying is that once the data arrives on your end of the connection, there is nothing you can do about it - the bandwidth has already been used. Regardless of how the routers along the way (and especially the system you are dialing into, as the dialin is the slow link) treat the data, there isn't anything the end user can do about it. You, as a client, on the slow end of a dialin line, have no control over which data you receive, unless you are connecting through an intelligent proxy (located on the fast end) which allows you to set these priorities. What the routers do between the client and the remote site is beyond the control of the client. -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: TCP/IP UDP priority
Hi, At 03:26 PM 6/28/98 -0400, William T Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 27 Jun 1998, Richard Sharpe wrote: I talk about how FTP typically sets the HIGH THROUGPUT TOS, and others (like Telnet) set the LOW DELAY TOS. And I mention that modern routers handled packets in the queue based on the TOS flags, and that I suspect that Linux can even do that. There's been a lot of talk on this subject and I'd like to clarify my standpoint. What I'm saying is that once the data arrives on your end of the connection, there is nothing you can do about it - the bandwidth has already been used. Regardless of how the routers along the way (and especially the system you are dialing into, as the dialin is the slow link) treat the data, there isn't anything the end user can do about it. You, as a client, on the slow end of a dialin line, have no control over which data you receive, unless you are connecting through an intelligent proxy (located on the fast end) which allows you to set these priorities. What the routers do between the client and the remote site is beyond the control of the client. I would have to say that you are absolutely correct. Once the data hits the machine, there is not much you can do. If you could get the web server to set low delay on the outgoing packets and the FTP server to set high throughput (which it should do), then you may be able to see a difference, as the FTP packets should get a lower priority than the HTTP packets, however, this depends on both the routers handling the TOS field correctly (which Ciscos do, I believe) and the PPP server doing likewise, and I am not convinced that the Linux based ones do that, but Cisco 5260s may do the right thing. One needs the PPP server to apply the same procedures because, as you mention, the PPP link is the slow link and it is more likely that queueing will occur on the PPP link. -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject. Regards --- Richard Sharpe, [EMAIL PROTECTED], NIC-Handle:RJS96 NS Computer Software and Services P/L, Ph: +61-8-8281-0063, FAX: +61-8-8250-2080, Samba, Linux, Apache, Digital UNIX, AIX, Netscape, Stronghold, C, ... -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: TCP/IP UDP priority
Wim Raets wrote: Hello all, I have a ppp-modem(33.6) connection to my ISP. I would like to change the priority of the different protocol I use. Example: I am FTP'ing a new kernel(+/- 10MB) at max speed (4K/s). If I would start surfing(http) now, the speed of webpages coming through would be terrible. So I would like to lower the priority of the ftp-connection and raise those of the http-connection. How can I do this ? Just a quick workaround, if you browse with netscape. Try ftp-ing using netscape, you'll get *some* balancing. dan -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: TCP/IP UDP priority
At the recieving end of this, you really can't control it. 2.2 will have the ability to put priority on different protocols, but doing so on incoming traffic makes very little difference. Chris - Visit Me At http://home.hiwaay.net/~jfrost - -- For My Public PGP Key Visit http://home.hiwaay.net/~jfrost/pgp_key.txt -- -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: TCP/IP UDP priority
On Fri, 26 Jun 1998, Wim Raets wrote: I am FTP'ing a new kernel(+/- 10MB) at max speed (4K/s). If I would start surfing(http) now, the speed of webpages coming through would be terrible. So I would like to lower the priority of the ftp-connection and raise those of the http-connection. How can I do this Short answer: You can't. Longer answer: You don't control the speed at which incoming data is received. You only control the speed at which outgoing data is sent. Therefore, you do not control the priorities which you seek to set. Furthermore, there really aren't any such "priorities", the speed of the data is controlled only by the capacity of the network hardware in between you and the remote sites. It would be possible to write software (which would have to be run at the ISP in the form of a proxy) that could allow such regulation to take place. I'm not aware of any such software, however. -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
RE: TCP/IP UDP priority
But I know the is a Windows utility called GetRight which does exactly what I want , but I want it on Linux. In GetRight you specify the maximum throughput and the speed will always be less than the maximum specified. Any ideas how I could this in Linux ??? Thanks in advance, Wim I am FTP'ing a new kernel(+/- 10MB) at max speed (4K/s). If I would start surfing(http) now, the speed of webpages coming through would be terrible. So I would like to lower the priority of the ftp-connection and raise those of the http-connection. How can I do this Short answer: You can't. Longer answer: You don't control the speed at which incoming data is received. You only control the speed at which outgoing data is sent. Therefore, you do not control the priorities which you seek to set. Furthermore, there really aren't any such "priorities", the speed of the data is controlled only by the capacity of the network hardware in between you and the remote sites. It would be possible to write software (which would have to be run at the ISP in the form of a proxy) that could allow such regulation to take place. I'm not aware of any such software, however. -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject. -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: TCP/IP UDP priority
At 05:41 AM 6/26/98 -0400, you wrote: Short answer: You can't. You can. :) (See below) [snip] It would be possible to write software (which would have to be run at the ISP in the form of a proxy) that could allow such regulation to take place. I'm not aware of any such software, however. According to the HOWTO, ipchains will do this. http://www.adelaide.net.au/~rustcorp/ipfwchains/HOWTO.html Look at section three. Search for "Manipulating the Type Of Service" and also take a look at section 3.2 (Useful Examples). Now, I've not done this myself, but I am considering it... Mike -- Mike Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Engineer - Prototype Development GTE Government Systems - All opinions are mine, not GTE's. -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
