From: "Denys" <denys@visp•net.lb>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash•net>
Cc: netdev@vger•kernel.org,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation•org>
Subject: Re: iproute2-2.6.20-070313 bug ?
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 15:26:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070322132021.M7074@visp.net.lb> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46027FF2.6020001@trash.net>
Dear sir
Sorry, i forgot to CC other members of discussion.
1024kb (if i am not wrong 1Mbyte) is huge?
For me it is ok, as soon as i have RAM. Another thing, it is working well
with old tc. Just really if i have plenty of RAM's and i want 32second
buffer, why i cannot have that, and if i see it is really possible before?
Possible i am misunderstanding something...
In real world i am seeing reasonable to have much bigger buffers, especially
if there is no problem in resources (RAM, timer resolution, CPU). For
example, as i remember we had failure on one of our STM-1, and Cisco's on
Teleglobe was buffering about 20-30seconds of data without major packetloss.
Another thing, why i was using buffer, and possible i use it wrong:
For example customer have 128Kbit/s account, and i want to give him burst to
open web-pages fast (256Kbit/s), but if he use bandwidth non-stop, he will
pass this buffer, and will be throttled back to 128Kbit/s. Now seems i cannot
give such functionality.
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 14:09:06 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote
> Denys wrote:
> > /sbin/tc2 qdisc del dev ppp0 root
> > /sbin/tc2 qdisc add dev ppp0 root handle 1: prio
> > /sbin/tc2 qdisc add dev ppp0 parent 1:1 handle 2: tbf buffer 1024kb
latency
> > 500ms rate 128kbit peakrate 256kbit minburst 16384
> > /sbin/tc2 filter add dev ppp0 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 10 u32 match ip
dst
> > 0.0.0.0/0 flowid 2:1
>
> That is an incredible huge buffer value.
>
> > qdisc tbf 2: parent 1:1 rate 128000bit burst 4294932937b peakrate
> 256000bit minburst 16Kb lat 4.2s
>
> And it causes an overflow.
>
> The limit for the TBF burst value with nanosecond resolution is
> ~ 4 * rate (10^9 * burst / rate < 2^32 needs to hold), resoluting
> in a worst-case latency of 4 seconds. I think this limit is in the
> reasonable range. Your configuration results in a worst-case
> queuing delay of 64s, and I doubt that you really want that.
>
> Obviously its not good to break existing configurations, but I
> would argue that this configuration is broken.
--
Virtual ISP S.A.L.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-22 13:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-21 18:00 iproute2-2.6.20-070313 bug ? Denys
2007-03-22 11:23 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-03-22 12:46 ` Denys
2007-03-22 13:09 ` Patrick McHardy
[not found] ` <20070322131245.M85528@visp.net.lb>
2007-03-22 13:23 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-03-22 13:35 ` Denys
[not found] ` <20070322132637.M88445@visp.net.lb>
2007-03-22 13:43 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-03-22 13:47 ` Denys
2007-03-22 13:26 ` Denys [this message]
2007-03-22 17:12 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-03-22 17:14 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-03-26 18:49 ` more... iproute2/htb/whatever critical " Denys
2007-03-27 15:10 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-03-27 15:18 ` Denys
2007-03-27 16:00 ` Denys
2007-03-27 16:21 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-03-28 17:38 ` another " Denys
2007-03-28 23:55 ` Denys
2007-03-29 10:58 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-03-31 2:26 ` more iproute2 issues (not critical) Denys
2007-03-31 2:31 ` Denys
2007-03-31 14:16 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-04-04 0:03 ` one more... iproute commands lockup whole system Denys
2007-04-04 1:10 ` jamal
2007-04-04 1:39 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-04-04 2:09 ` jamal
2007-04-04 2:11 ` Denys
2007-04-04 10:55 ` jamal
2007-04-04 12:56 ` Denys
2007-04-04 14:10 ` jamal
2007-04-04 14:35 ` Denys
2007-04-04 14:13 ` HTB/act_mirred problem [was: one more... iproute commands lockup whole system] Patrick McHardy
2007-04-04 14:33 ` jamal
2007-04-04 14:50 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-04-05 1:33 ` jamal
2007-04-04 13:36 ` one more... iproute commands lockup whole system Patrick McHardy
2007-04-04 13:58 ` jamal
2007-04-04 14:07 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-04-04 14:30 ` jamal
2007-04-04 14:39 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-04-05 2:14 ` jamal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070322132021.M7074@visp.net.lb \
--to=denys@visp$(echo .)net.lb \
--cc=kaber@trash$(echo .)net \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=shemminger@linux-foundation$(echo .)org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox