[LARTC] Weighted packet shaping?

[Andy Furniss]

marco ghidinelli wrote:

> 
> ok, maybe i'm wrong, but i try to run the same script, and i think that
> the script have problem setting prio 0 on filters:
> 
> running:
> 
> $TC filter add dev $IFNAME parent 1:0 prio 0 protocol ip handle 22 fw
> flowid 1:20
> $TC filter add dev $IFNAME parent 1:0 prio 2 protocol ip handle 21 fw
> flowid 1:21
> 
> gave me:
> 
> # tc filter list dev eth0
> filter parent 1: protocol ip pref 2 fw 
> filter parent 1: protocol ip pref 2 fw handle 0x15 classid 1:21 
> filter parent 1: protocol ip pref 49152 fw 
> filter parent 1: protocol ip pref 49152 fw handle 0x16 classid 1:20 
> 
> ----------------------------------^^^^^
> 
> don't blame me if this is obvious/wrong/stupid. :)

Well spotted - you are right, I see the same, so it looks like 0 is not 
the highest prio when used on filters - I shall use 1 in future.

As for affecting this test - I don't think it will make any difference 
in this case because it just affects the order that the matches get 
tested against the packets. With only 3 tests and low packets/sec it 
should makes no difference.

It's still usefull to know for other setups, though - thanks.

Andy.

> 
> 2.6.10, with lastest iproute2
>