Community discussions

MUM Europe 2020

Search found 18 matches

by WISP-BG
Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:44 am
Forum: General
Topic: Simple question about priority
Replies: 45
Views: 6577

Re: Simple question about priority

8) Et voila! That's why I asked this question - the half of Mikrotik community thinks that priority works with "max-limit" on each child queue only, the other half - with "max-limit" on parent queue, and the third half :) - with "limit-at" only. But in examples in the manual, we see that "limit-at" ...
by WISP-BG
Fri Mar 19, 2010 6:11 pm
Forum: General
Topic: Simple question about priority
Replies: 45
Views: 6577

Re: Simple question about priority

Yes, according to "...to child queues so that they are able to reach max-limit".
But "Priority is responsible for distribution of remaining parent queues traffic..." tells me something different. So, if we don't have limit in parent queue, we have no remaining traffic in it too.
by WISP-BG
Fri Mar 19, 2010 9:56 am
Forum: General
Topic: Simple question about priority
Replies: 45
Views: 6577

Re: Simple question about priority

OK, but let's go back to the manual here: "We already know that limit-at (CIR) to all queues will be given out no matter what. Priority is responsible for distribution of remaining parent queues traffic to child queues so that they are able to reach max-limit Make a note that priority only works: * ...
by WISP-BG
Wed Mar 17, 2010 8:24 am
Forum: General
Topic: Simple question about priority
Replies: 45
Views: 6577

Re: Simple question about priority

Oh my friend, you brought even more confusion, not clearness. In the past, in old versions of the manual, I remember it was written in this way, but look at the new wiki: "Child queue with higher priority will have chance to reach its limit-at before child with lower priority and after that child qu...
by WISP-BG
Tue Mar 16, 2010 5:55 pm
Forum: General
Topic: Simple question about priority
Replies: 45
Views: 6577

Re: Simple question about priority

Well, I read it. And watched the movie too. This phrase ("priority doesn't work without limitation") is present in both places, but that's all, nothing more.
by WISP-BG
Tue Mar 16, 2010 1:02 pm
Forum: General
Topic: Simple question about priority
Replies: 45
Views: 6577

Re: Simple question about priority

Nobody knows? :(
by WISP-BG
Sat Mar 13, 2010 12:57 pm
Forum: General
Topic: Simple question about priority
Replies: 45
Views: 6577

Simple question about priority

What exactly mean "priority doesn't work without limitation":

1) priority doesn't work without limitation in parent queue;
2) priority doesn't work without limitation in each child queue;
3) both?

Tx
by WISP-BG
Fri Mar 12, 2010 1:55 pm
Forum: General
Topic: Is (( PRIORITY )) Really working ???
Replies: 188
Views: 39215

Re: Is (( PRIORITY )) Really working ???

OK, after several additional tests, I think the problem is that we can't mark same connections simultaneously in "prerouting" and "forward" by different criteria. Packets - yes, but connections - no. Otherwise strange things happen. So, if you use mark connection -> mark packet in "forward" for shap...
by WISP-BG
Wed Mar 10, 2010 5:21 pm
Forum: General
Topic: Is (( PRIORITY )) Really working ???
Replies: 188
Views: 39215

Re: Is (( PRIORITY )) Really working ???

No, I know that. You don't understand me... My point is, when you mark connection for some reason in "prerouting" whit src. port 80 (or else), this connection become unmarkable in "forward" whith src. address. Simply pass through. But it is sufficient to disable the rule in "prerouting", and voila -...
by WISP-BG
Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:26 am
Forum: General
Topic: Is (( PRIORITY )) Really working ???
Replies: 188
Views: 39215

Re: Is (( PRIORITY )) Really working ???

No, it's just an example. But why is this happening? I thought that the two chains are completely independent of each other...
Appears that they are not, or I do not understand something... :-?
by WISP-BG
Tue Mar 09, 2010 7:48 pm
Forum: General
Topic: Is (( PRIORITY )) Really working ???
Replies: 188
Views: 39215

Re: Is (( PRIORITY )) Really working ???

For example: If we have in prerouting 1 chain=prerouting action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=http passthrough=yes protocol=tcp src-port=80 In forward 2 chain=forward action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=cl-conn passthrough=yes src-address-list=Clients 3 chain=forward action=mark-packet ...
by WISP-BG
Tue Mar 09, 2010 2:24 pm
Forum: General
Topic: Is (( PRIORITY )) Really working ???
Replies: 188
Views: 39215

Re: Is (( PRIORITY )) Really working ???

In some of our tests we found that if we mark connection in "prerouting", for example with src. port 80, it is not possible to mark this connection again in "forward" with src. address or list. When we mark packet directly, this is not happen.
Where is the mistake or this is a bug?
Tx
by WISP-BG
Sat Nov 25, 2006 2:55 pm
Forum: General
Topic: Max rate posible in pcq?
Replies: 0
Views: 656

Max rate posible in pcq?

I think, 13 - 14 Mbps is maximum data rate that one pcq queue can handle. When I set 20M, for instance, nothing's happen - always 13-14 max.
Is that correct, or I miss somethimg?
Tanks
by WISP-BG
Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:36 pm
Forum: General
Topic: Strange problem with src-nat
Replies: 7
Views: 2359

:? Hmm... But it basically works, the problem occur only in websites with user/pass, and not in all sites, just a few. It's no sense using src-nat to map, say 254 private adressess to same range real ones.
by WISP-BG
Sun Oct 10, 2004 9:51 pm
Forum: General
Topic: Strange problem with src-nat
Replies: 7
Views: 2359

Yes, I know that, but I look for some elegant way to solve the problem.

ICQ? A? :)
by WISP-BG
Fri Oct 08, 2004 11:54 am
Forum: General
Topic: Strange problem with src-nat
Replies: 7
Views: 2359

Strange problem with src-nat

When I use src-nat to hide all my private network 192.168.x.x/24 behind a range of real IP-adresses, say x.x.x.65 - x.x.x.69, strange things happen - some sites with loging/password (mail, bank-services) frequently loses connection and you must reconnect and loging again. Any suggestion or help? Tha...
by WISP-BG
Tue Jun 22, 2004 9:13 am
Forum: General
Topic: How to put LAN to use public IPs without bridge?
Replies: 10
Views: 4639

Why don't you simply route the public IPs (subnet) inside the LAN?
by WISP-BG
Tue Jun 01, 2004 11:23 am
Forum: General
Topic: Queues for a whole IP class
Replies: 2
Views: 2539

Re: Queues for a whole IP class

I will like to know if there is a way to create a simple queue for a whole IP class on the 2.8 versions.
For example

10.10.10.0/32
For whole class C use 10.10.10.0/24