Community discussions

MUM Europe 2020
 
ceL
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Topic Author
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 12:15 am

Help Please!! Bandwidth control problem

Fri Nov 11, 2005 12:55 am

I've tried using Red and PCQ both to limit bandwidth down to 256k/128k only for specific IP addresses, actually we have 2 class c's I setup simple queues for each IP which was 2 simple queue rules per IP which in the end is around 400 simple queue rules, this caused the load on the router to go to 100% so I removed them, was having trouble with them getting added anyway, PCQ was doing a set amount of bandwidth for example 256k and sharing it only for that class not IP based, I'm not sure what we should be using to limit bandwidth per IP and I don't want the CPU load to be just 100% on a constant basis, if anyone has any ideas let me know, but here's an example of one of my rules for the simple queue I was using.

add name="10.104.4.11-D" target-address=10.104.4.11/32 dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 interface=C900 \
queue=Red priority=8 limit-at=256000/256000 max-limit=256000/256000 \
burst-limit=512000/512000 burst-threshold=126000/126000 burst-time=60/60 disabled=no
add name="10.104.4.11-U" target-address=10.104.4.11/32 dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 interface=GW queue=Red \
priority=8 limit-at=0/0 max-limit=128000/128000 disabled=no
add name="10.104.4.12-D" target-address=10.104.4.12/32 dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 interface=C900 \
queue=Red priority=8 limit-at=256000/256000 max-limit=256000/256000 \
burst-limit=512000/512000 burst-threshold=126000/126000 burst-time=60/60 disabled=no
add name="10.104.4.12-U" target-address=10.104.4.12/32 dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 interface=GW queue=Red \
priority=8 limit-at=0/0 max-limit=128000/128000 disabled=no
add name="10.104.4.13-D" target-address=10.104.4.13/32 dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 interface=C900 \
queue=Red priority=8 limit-at=256000/256000 max-limit=256000/256000 \
burst-limit=512000/512000 burst-threshold=126000/126000 burst-time=60/60 disabled=no
add name="10.104.4.13-U" target-address=10.104.4.13/32 dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 interface=GW queue=Red \
priority=8 limit-at=0/0 max-limit=128000/128000 disabled=no

^ above shows you 3 ip addresses simple queue rules

I'd be extremely appreciative of any ideas anyone has to fix this bandwidth control issue, what we have is 4 packages, a basic (256k/128k) , a bronze, a silver and a gold all have different speeds of bandwidth which need limited by IP address, most routers have 2 class c's so their would be a great deal of rules, please help.
 
paul3
just joined
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 1:34 am

Queues per user

Fri Nov 11, 2005 2:09 am

RED is a very processor intensive queing technique, use pfifo instead, it works fine to give users their appropriate bandwidth, you don't need RED.

If you use the hotspot, it will automatically create a queue as each user logs on and destroy it when they log off.

I guess you could create the queues manually (or with a script), and I it is possible that even with pfifo you might kill the processor if you had too many queues. You migth want to throw another mtick in there and segment the traffic between them.
 
ceL
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Topic Author
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 12:15 am

Fri Nov 11, 2005 2:27 am

One more thing, will I need need 2 simple queues per IP one for upload and one for download or not? I'm sort of confused and the documentation is a little hard to understand in some areas, but could I just change the Red queue type I had before to a "Kind: pfifo" and it should work right? or remove the 2 simple queues and just have 1 queue per ip, will that manage both download and upload rates?
 
paul3
just joined
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 1:34 am

Single Queue

Fri Nov 11, 2005 2:53 am

Only one queue entry. Here is the listing of one of ours, just make the direction = both:

2 D name="<hotspot-sshea>" target-addresses=10.4.230.93/32 dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 interface=all
parent=none direction=both priority=8 queue=default/default limit-at=3000000/3000000
max-limit=3000000/3000000 total-queue=default

This is a user with our "gold" service. Now our max bandwidth out of the location is 3000000, so if multiple people are trying to use it of course no one will get full bandwidth. But if just one person is and you do a speed test it will come out right at 3megs. You may have to tweak the number up a little bit to get the right reading on the speed test for slower plans. Just experiment.
 
ceL
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Topic Author
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 12:15 am

Fri Nov 11, 2005 3:10 am

You have been a HUGE help for me I really appreciate it and I would love to shake your hand hehe, this was so confusing for me, thanks again
 
paul3
just joined
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 1:34 am

Fri Nov 11, 2005 3:17 am

No problem..... We have all been there. The "documentation is a little hard to understand in some areas" is an understatement. But then again, I am not sure I could re-write it any better, it deals with pretty complex stuff.
 
ceL
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Topic Author
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 12:15 am

Fri Nov 11, 2005 8:03 am

Don't think my older mikrotik supports "direction" but it looks like it's working when i set the tx/rx speeds for them :D so i'm not complaining, but how does burst-threshold work? and burst-time, 60/60 would be 60 seconds for tx and 60 seconds for rx right?
 
boardman
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 260
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 11:10 pm
Location: Mexico
Contact:

Fri Nov 11, 2005 6:32 pm

 
ceL
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Topic Author
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 12:15 am

Fri Nov 11, 2005 7:44 pm

i'm 2.8, that manual doesn't apply to me, kthx nice try though, hense why I said "older mikrotik", but anyways what would you use the limit-at feature for, as I read the documentation and understand it as when this is on if someone else with a higher priority needs more bandwidth it will limit people with the limit-at's to that limit and give the remaining to whomever needs it?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: faxxe, Google [Bot], MSN [Bot] and 95 guests