Community discussions

MUM Europe 2020
 
User avatar
whalen
newbie
Topic Author
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 4:08 pm
Location: Belleville, MI

MikroTIk 2.8.11 Problem with Simple Queues

Wed Jun 30, 2004 5:18 pm

Just recently upgraded to 2.8.11 from 2.7, and now are having a problem with how we had our simple queues setup.

We had a simple queue for each customer IP to limit downloads. Then, to prevent unauthorized IPs from gaining access, we added rules at the bottom of the list to limit the entire subnet to, say, 400bps. It used to work so that anyone that had a queue for their IP would get their share of the bandwidth, and anyone who didnt would go to that "default" queue and would get next to nothing.

After the upgrade, the queues for each customer no longer worked. To limit each IP, i had to go to the "Advanced" tab and enter values for Total Limit and Total Max limit for it to work. After i got that working, I noticed that the default queues werent working. Data was shown flowing through them, and if i set it to 400bps, it would limit everyone to 400bps, even if they had a queue above it specified in simple queues.

Here is a sample of the simple queues:
59 name="Coop3_D" target-address=0.0.0.0/0 dst-address=192.168.0.5/32
interface=coop queue=default priority=8 limit-at=0/0
max-limit=0/0 total-limit-at=768000 total-max-limit=768000

60 name="Coop4_D" target-address=0.0.0.0/0 dst-address=192.168.0.6/32
interface=coop queue=default priority=8 limit-at=0/0
max-limit=0/0 total-limit-at=768000 total-max-limit=768000

61 X name="z Coop Default Down" target-address=0.0.0.0/0
dst-address=192.168.0.0/24 interface=coop queue=default priority=8
limit-at=400/400 max-limit=400/400


Any ideas? Thanks in advance for any help or suggestions.
 
Bill
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 4:24 pm
Location: Nevada

Wed Jun 30, 2004 9:16 pm

The simple queues now allow you to control upload and download speed with one entry. The client IP you are controlling goes in the Target Address box. Set the interface to All. It should work without setting any of the Advanced queue settings.
 
User avatar
whalen
newbie
Topic Author
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 4:08 pm
Location: Belleville, MI

Wed Jun 30, 2004 11:57 pm

Thank you very much i will try this when i get home.
 
User avatar
whalen
newbie
Topic Author
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 4:08 pm
Location: Belleville, MI

Thu Jul 01, 2004 2:13 am

Works great thank you!!!!! :D
 
erikturk
just joined
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 1:41 pm

Fri Jul 02, 2004 1:25 pm

How do you do unequal upload/download queues with one entry? I want to give our customers 512 down and 256 up.
 
Bill
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 4:24 pm
Location: Nevada

Fri Jul 02, 2004 3:17 pm

You just enter the limits with a slash. For a 256 upload and 512 download I use 262144/524288.
 
erikturk
just joined
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 1:41 pm

Fri Jul 02, 2004 3:20 pm

Bill - thank you

Sometimes I just need to be told, even though it's staring me in the face!

thanks again.

Erik
 
Bill
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 4:24 pm
Location: Nevada

Fri Jul 02, 2004 3:24 pm

Glad to help. It took me some time to figure it out and get it working. The manual is good, but not always as clear as it could be. :)
 
User avatar
whalen
newbie
Topic Author
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 4:08 pm
Location: Belleville, MI

Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:35 pm

There is no way to get simple queues to limit up/down with a NAT'd address right? Still have to mangle the traffic and use the QUeue Tree?
 
erikturk
just joined
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 1:41 pm

Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:41 pm

Do you mean a public NAT'd address? I hope not....

I have a public IP that all my clients are natted behind, and they _seem_ to be behaving according to the queues that I set up (just this morning!!)

I'd be interested in hearing from someone more confident about this than I am.

Erik
 
Bill
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 4:24 pm
Location: Nevada

Sat Jul 03, 2004 1:27 am

The queues were change in 2.8. It is no longer necessary to mangle the traffic and use trees to control clients. The only mangle rules I have are passthrough flowmarks for normal and p2p traffic so that I can use a queue tree to control p2p speed. All the queues to control client speed are simple queues, one for each ip address (or block of addresses) that controls both up and down speed.
 
daniel
newbie
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 11:46 am
Location: Bulgaria

Sat Jul 03, 2004 10:38 am

It seems you still need to mark traffic and use queue trees if the customer has non-contiguous address space.
 
User avatar
whalen
newbie
Topic Author
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 4:08 pm
Location: Belleville, MI

Sat Jul 03, 2004 8:46 pm

The queues were change in 2.8. It is no longer necessary to mangle the traffic and use trees to control clients. The only mangle rules I have are passthrough flowmarks for normal and p2p traffic so that I can use a queue tree to control p2p speed. All the queues to control client speed are simple queues, one for each ip address (or block of addresses) that controls both up and down speed.
I have NAT'd clients, and i still have to mangle and use a queue in the queue tree to limit uploads. Downloads work w/ simple queues, but uploads need to be mangled. My public IPs in MT work fine w/ one simple queue...are you sure about that?
 
Bill
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 4:24 pm
Location: Nevada

Sat Jul 03, 2004 11:25 pm

My clients are all NAT'ed. I throttle each one by IP address with a Simple Queue that controls both upload and download. The only Mangle rules I have are to add Normal and P2P flowmarks to the traffic. Do you have your Mangle rules set to Passthrough or Accept? I have read this can affect queue processing if set to Accept.

My initial MT testing was done with 2.7, but I switched to 2.8 early on (beta 3) for the updated queue processing and the P2P control. I have been using it for almost a year now.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CZFan, Jatzoo and 143 guests