> No.
>
> a) There is nothing wrong with a single user using all available
> bandwidth if that user is the only one using the network.
>
> b) What I prefer is to assign priorities, guarantees and maximums based
> on the TYPE of traffic (web, mail, p2p, etc) rather than by IP address.
> It scales *much* better.
>
> c) In addition to HTB, Shorewall configures each interface to use SFQ
> which guarantees fairness among traffic with the same priority. So one
> user can't monopolize the traffic if you take my approach.
>
> d) What you are doing is a pain to set up and configure and forces each
> packet through your firewall to pass through 200 rules! In the xtables
> addons, there is an IPMARK target which will do what you are doing in a
> single rule; but you would need to use it out of a Shorewall extension
> script.
>
> e) You have 100 users which you are guaranteeing 128kbit each for
> upload. So your total outgoing guarantee on eth1 is > 12800kbit even
> though the total capacity of the link is only 900kbit. So your
> configuration will work miserably.


Thank you for your answer. I read again documentations about shaping and HTB and
I decided to change ma queues according to your propositions. Below is
a simple configurations:

tcrules:
1:F       0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0    icmp    echo-request
1:F       0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0    icmp    echo-reply
1:F       0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0    tcp     53
1:F       0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0    udp     53
1:F       0.0.0.0/0 192.168.0.199/32       tcp     22

2         192.168.0.0/24        0.0.0.0/0       tcp     80,443
2:F       eth1                  192.168.0.0/24  tcp     80,443

3         192.168.0.0/24        0.0.0.0/0       tcp     25,465,110,143,993,995
3:F       eth1                  192.168.0.0/24  tcp     25,465,110,143,993,995

4         192.168.0.0/24        0.0.0.0/0       all     -
4:F       eth1                  192.168.0.0/24  all     -

tcclasses:
eth1            1               5*full/10       full         1
tcp-ack,tos-minimize-delay
eth0            1               5*full/10       full         1
tcp-ack,tos-minimize-delay

eth1            2               3*full/10       9*full/10    2
eth0            2               3*full/10       9*full/10    2

eth1            3               2*full/10       9*full/10    3
eth0            3               2*full/10       9*full/10    3

eth1            4               2*full/10       8*full/10    4       default
eth0            4               2*full/10       8*full/10    4       default


Generally I had a priority per service, You are absolutly right that
build about 200 (and more) queues per user
is not good idea. I think per service configuration works much better
and faster. What do you think about my configuration,
Should I more improve this ?
Thank you a lot

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
SourcForge Community
SourceForge wants to tell your story.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users

Reply via email to