www.zeroshell.org Forum Index www.zeroshell.org
Linux Distribution for server and embedded devices
 
 SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile  Log inLog in  Log in to check your private messagesPrivate Message 

Is Netbalancer/QoS patch included in ZS 0.1b14
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.zeroshell.org Forum Index -> ZeroShell
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
atheling



Joined: 24 Sep 2009
Posts: 212

PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lyron wrote:
Well, Im very sad to update that it doesn't work for me... I downloads +/- 450 mb and then it drops... Its better than after (+/- 3 mb), but I really need connection stability...

Maybe I'm missing something? :S


Any chance your ISP(s) are doing traffic management? I know that one of my two ISPs definitely clamps down on bandwidth after a few seconds of heavy transfers...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DrmCa



Joined: 12 Apr 2011
Posts: 220

PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 2:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lyron wrote:
Well, Im very sad to update that it doesnt work for me... I downloads +/- 450 mb and then it drops... Its better than after (+/- 3 mb), but I really need connection stability...

Maybe Im missing something? :S


How are you testing the d/l, can you describe the scenarios and software you are using?

Sorry, just being an ass - you do realize that single-stream d/l will not be load balanced under any circumstances in this case? Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to insult your intelligence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DrmCa



Joined: 12 Apr 2011
Posts: 220

PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

atheling wrote:
Lyron wrote:
Well, Im very sad to update that it doesn't work for me... I downloads +/- 450 mb and then it drops... Its better than after (+/- 3 mb), but I really need connection stability...

Maybe I'm missing something? :S


Any chance your ISP(s) are doing traffic management? I know that one of my two ISPs definitely clamps down on bandwidth after a few seconds of heavy transfers...


Hi Atheling,

Some news: Sometimes I have to add more than 1 segment for the D/L to increase in speed to 2x that of a single connection. Actually, in at least 50% cases. Can you check your patch again, it looks like if the d/ls are started less than a few seconds apart, they would not be load balanced.

Appreciate your help!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
atheling



Joined: 24 Sep 2009
Posts: 212

PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 3:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DrmCa wrote:

Hi Atheling,

Some news: Sometimes I have to add more than 1 segment for the D/L to increase in speed to 2x that of a single connection. Actually, in at least 50% cases. Can you check your patch again, it looks like if the d/ls are started less than a few seconds apart, they would not be load balanced.

Appreciate your help!


I think you might be running into the basic way that Linux routing works. What the patch does is setup iptables to tag packets for several purposes in a way that are compatible with one another:

1. For routing so that all packets in one connection use the same WAN interface.
2. For unsolicited packets received via a gateway to be responded to on the same gateway (allows you to run a server on your LAN).
3. For QoS so that packets going out of an interface are prioritised correctly.

(There is a bit more so that the pings used for detecting dead gateways don't keep flushing the routing cache, but that should not be an issue for this discussion.)

Your concern appears to be the selection of which WAN gateway to use for a new connection. This is unchanged by my patch and is made by the Linux kernel network routing logic based on the relative weights you specify. Connections that do not have a gateway tagged already are handled by the main routing table.

I don't have access to my home system from here (my employer's firewall blocks OpenVPN) so I can't show you a console capture. But if you issue the following from the command shell you can see the IP routing rules:

Code:
ip rule list


The rules that have a realm associated with them are used for existing connections. Untagged packets will be handled by the "main" routing table. You can view that with

Code:
ip route list table main


The "default" rule at the bottom of that table will list your various gateways and a weights to apply to them. This is the rule that is triggered for new connections. Be advised, however that even this rule is not triggered if there is already a route to the destination that has been cached. In short, from your description, I suspect that the issues you are bringing up are with respect to how Linux does routing more than how Zeroshell, with or without my patch, sets up the IP routing subsystem.

There is a wealth of information, often unclear or contradictory, on load balancing using Linux. If you wish to understand it better I suggest you start with the section on load balancing for multiple gateways on the Linux Advanced Routing and Traffic Control website: http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DrmCa



Joined: 12 Apr 2011
Posts: 220

PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 8:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Atheling,

If Linux can't do load balancing the way I would like (i.e. load balance multisegment downloads w/o manual intervention by starting another segment a few seconds later), then I guess I have to keep looking for different solutions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
frekase



Joined: 10 Oct 2011
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 8:43 pm    Post subject: Net Balancing and QoS Reply with quote

Hey,

Id like to use both at the same time. Is that patch you talked about included in beta16? Until now I just use one pc for QoS and one pc for Net Balancing. I would like to use only one pc.

Thanks. And much thanks to Fulvio.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DrmCa



Joined: 12 Apr 2011
Posts: 220

PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2013 4:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just wanted to mention an issue I ran into while restoring previously working load balanced profile:

The WAN interfaces should not be set up as default routes, none of them.

If any one L/B WAN interface was a default route, than no L/B would occur.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.zeroshell.org Forum Index -> ZeroShell All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group