Forum Replies Created
Thanks for the fast reply, Fulvio.
I’ve tried the code in shell prompt and works.
I also have put the code in Startup script to make it permanent, this is the way, isn’t it?
MAMarch 14, 2008 at 1:35 pm in reply to: QoS: Classifier works but not assign to proper target Class #46209
I reply in english because this an english forum (i prefer in spanish but..), and I reply to you using the forum and no private way because we must contribute to knowledge of the comunity.
Shapping P2P is not effective at 100% (in general, not in Zeroshell), you can shape some P2P (emule,..) and only block other (ares). Furthermore, Zeroshell (or Linux kernel, I don’t know) has some strange behaviour, as you can see in my previous post.
I’ve it in a bridged Zeroshell box, but you can do it in a routed box.
1.- First you have to create the classes (QoS->Class manager): One for prioritary traffic (with High priority), one for P2P (Low priority). This would be enough for a minimal configuration.
2.- Now you must define the global bandwith of the interfaces (two, I suposse) in QoS->Interface manager.
3.- Now you must define the rules in QoS->Classifier. Theoretically, lower rule is prioritary to higher rule, but most likely you will have to reorder them to get more effectiveness.
You must create rules to get prio traffic matched. Example: one rule with Layer 7 filter and HTTP protocol and other rule with SSL protocol. You must specify the target class in the rules.
You must create rules to get P2P traffic matched. Example: one rule with ipp2p match (peer-to-peer), other with Layer 7 and bittorrent protocol, and so.
4.- Now you must assign the classes to the interfaces. The two classes to each interfaces, and most likely change the parameter (local parameter) of the class, if you have different values in upstream and downstream.
Other question is that traffic not matched is collected in the “DEFAULT” class.
I think this is enough.
And keep in mind that if you make changes in classifier you must reset QoS (I normally reboot, to get sure)
MichaelMarch 11, 2008 at 9:30 pm in reply to: QoS: Classifier works but not assign to proper target Class #46207
I’ve solved the problem.
I’ve put the rules of class “DESCARGAS” in the bottom of them and now that traffic is assigned ok to that class. 😯
Strange behaviour, isn’t it? 😕
It is certainly something I would like to see improved at some point, as I am currently using it to manage about 1000 clients (works very well).
If I’m not mistaken, If you want to manage bandwidth for 1000 clients (1000 IPs ?) you have to:
– Creating 1000×2 (upload, download) classes
– Assign 1000 classes to interface A, 1000 to interface B
– Configure 1000×2 rules in the classifier
Each “add action” takes one web page reload: 4000 web pages reload to get it.
At the moment, definititely Qos rules manager is not suitable for large number os rules. 😕
apart from that, Zeroshell is fantastic! 😉
… I now just need to add my rules back in, keeping it under 60 🙂
It is not entirely clear to me whether you have lost your rules or not…
Do you have kept 1-60 rules?
On the other hand, I think the big problem is that the web interface to manage the classifier is not suitable for a large number of rules/classes (>60). Is hard to support.
I think would be better an interface to manage rules in a group.
Could you try with a new DB?
I’ll try, but it will take to me a long time.
I’ll post the result.
thanks for the new release, Fulvio.
Now, the classifier page doesn’t crash with 60 entries, but….
now a strange behaviour happens: 60th entry is duplicated, the second 60 entry lost the Qos class assignment and I can’t delete rear entries (61, 62..), because when I save the changes, these ones appear again 😕
I’ll waiting for next release.
Thanks very much.
my hardware: (not a server, ordinary PC):
-PC 2.4 GHz
-2 GB RAM
-2 net cards
never reaching more up to 1% CPU load
1. Is Zeroshell stable – need router for 70 hosts
In my scenario, working for 60 hosts, works fine
2. Does QoS work fine?
3. Does QoS wok in fine in router mode?
I’ve it in router mode. Works fine. I only noticed that client ftp must be configured to work in passive mode. ❓
I think it makes no sense to integrate Mastershaper because Zeroshell has all the features that Mastershaper has (except for traffic monitoring). Moreover, Mastershaper development is at a standstill (last news is from DEC-06)
I have used Mastershaper and.. Zeroshell is much better!
Now works fine.
I’ve created the LIMITED class in last position and now… all traffic goes to this class ❓
I’m very confused. 😯
I know you have released beta5 5 days ago (thanks very much).
When do you think beta6 will be released?
Net Balancer would be a nice and powerfull tool.