Is this the proper way to do things? Everything appears to work ok. The only thing I am unsure about is if i should adjust limit-at to something smaller. For example, if we had 50 customers and 3.0Mbps, should i change the limit-at parameter to something like 60Kbps/60Kbps? (3000Kbps/50 = 60Kbps).
Right now it seems that if the 3.0Mb pipe is maxed out, then all of the queus may begin fighting since they have been promised their 768Kb/512Kb rates.
limit-at: 256k/394k
max-limit: 512k/768k
burst-threshold: 512k/768k
burst-limit: 768k/1024k
burst-time: 10 (seconds) this is good for browsing so they can open websites faster, i don’t see any other use for this. What’s the point to burst donwloads?!
Do not worry that 50 customers will use net at the same time, unless they organize themself for somekind of revenge
My concern isn’t that all 50 would use the net at the same time, it is that in the event that all of the available bandwidth were used up, that problems would develop because the queues essentially were expecting to have 512k/768k available to them.
Well, limit at will guaranty QoS. This is something that nobody can tell ya.
1/2 of the max-limit is working fine for me, but in your case (cause you are givinin them larger bandwidths on just 3mbit/s) I would maybe try to do 1/4 so queues will go down when the link is congested!
Yes. limit-at is quaranteed speed, meaning, you set router to always provide at least that speed to the client. It is possible only if that speed is actualy available. if you set limit-at to 60kbps that means that. in worst case, if all of them havily use link at the same time, they will all really have 60kbps available, becauselink allows that.
If you set higher number, router will not be able to provide quaranteed speed, simple because there is no enough uplink bandwidth.
