2.0RC Shaping Question :: Sip not easily definable, can port definitions be used



  • In 1.2.x it was easy to edit the traffic shaper wizard to allow your custom port definition to be picked up by the wizard. As a result, all of the ports used for sip, since we knew what they would be, were easily defined and picked up. All inbound/outbound sip traffic also matched the voip queue.

    I have seen in the 2.0 wizard that there are the same appearances in the wizard, however the "asterisk, generic, etc." definitions are simply there as a placeholder but no longer match ports, and I can't seem to understand how the new shaper works since it is not matching any traffic as desired for sip related services.

    I have read the developer notes regarding traffic shaping for 2.0. I have looked through the protocol definitions. I have also created layer 7 definitions by defining/creating my own patterns. None of this has worked.

    Is it no longer possible to do port matching shaping with the wizard in 2.0?

    For example, I have two different ports I use for sip, and two different port ranges for media. How do I use the shaper in 2.0 to match these and place them into the proper queue and prioritize them? Normally I would have edited the wizard definitions, but these no longer exist. At the same time, using the IP of my sip server doesn't work either.

    I realize it is a work in progress, but I'd like to understand if the shaper is actually functional yet in 2.0.

    Question: Can I define custom port ranges and shape it in 2.0?

    I think it would be necessary to create 50-80 custom layer 7 patterns to properly shape sip (only one is provided) using l7 shaping. I imagine a filter is needed for invite, reinvite, media offer, media established, refer, rts, sips, tls, rtps, etc., for each UA type, b2bua and sip server and provider. This seems like a lot of work.

    While it's nice to see l7 shaping and limiters, it would be nice to define ports in lieu of defining every UA and firmware nuance for every type of transaction in sip.

    Is the port definition still there but buried elsewhere? I just can't find it by following the scripts.



  • Seriously, I don't see point in using the placeholder to tease one with the allure that it actually shapes anything in regard to the wizard and sip. Can someone at least acknowledge that the wizard needs to remove those pieces because it is very misleading.



  • Not sure what you're trying to do here.  SIP itself is not particularly flaky as far as QoS goes - generally folks care about the audio packets.  I know the shaper works for shaping outbound RTP in 2.0 for a specific IP, as I've used it for that.



  • @danswartz:

    Not sure what you're trying to do here.  SIP itself is not particularly flaky as far as QoS goes - generally folks care about the audio packets.  I know the shaper works for shaping outbound RTP in 2.0 for a specific IP, as I've used it for that.

    I run a sip server behind the firewall, with remote users and sip trunks on the outside as well as internal users (inside).

    The current shaping function in 2.0 is meaningless. v1.2.3 works beautifully. No, I care about the RTP as well as differentiating the trunking and remote user signalling. Under 1.2.3 I am able to shape it all under the wizard by adding a few lines.

    The 2.0 shaper is quite unable to shape when your main server is behind the firewall and not hosted. It does not have a way to define ports. RTP, while I can define it by ports, does not work with the "supplied" signature for RTP and the L7 mechanism does not seem to recognize the filters created. Since a number of different UA's and providers might be in play here, the ident string for each variant (INVITE, REINVITE, etc.) might be different. However I am simply repeating myself and am asking a specific question, to which has not been addressed by you or anyone yet.



  • Well, forgive me for forcing you to expend effort repeating yourself.  I wasn't clear what you were trying to do.  With an attitude like that, no wonder no one has stepped forward.  Good luck.



  • @danswartz:

    Well, forgive me for forcing you to expend effort repeating yourself.  I wasn't clear what you were trying to do.  With an attitude like that, no wonder no one has stepped forward.  Good luck.

    I just had hoped for an answser to my question, which was specific. Not a general comment. Thanks for your attention.

    I have found 2.0 to be flaky for many months. Every time I try to move a few connections over to it, there is something else that doesn't work. I have repeatedly posted about traffic shaping, and I I get are comments. I'm trying to understand how to do something specific, or whether the approach has been abandoned because i waste a lot of time trying, posting, and reverting systems back to 1.2x. I am scratching my head wondering if anyone knows the answer to my question.

    So let me rephrase the question in a very blunt and not easy to misinterpret way:

    Since port shaping seems to be removed in 2.0RC2, will it be reintroduced, or is it simply not going to be carried forward from 1,.2.x?

    Answers would be appreciated.


  • Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate

    You can shape ports just fine. Use floating rules to match the traffic and direct it into whatever queues you want. You can match on anything now.

    That said, currently the wizard isn't creating the LAN-side queues properly (or at all). It still needs some work before 2.0-RELEASE of course.

    Some people have found that simply copying the WAN queues to the LAN side gives them something they can work with.



  • Hi Jim, can you elaborate on "copying the WAN queues to the LAN side".

    For instance if I have 2 wans, would I combine the downstream bandwidth of them and put this number in the LAN root bandwidth? Then just simulate the same WAN subQs under LAN?

    The floating rules looks to work well, I use port aliases to put in these rules and force a Q.


  • Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate

    I don't recall exactly what others have done, but that sounds similar. Search through the forum and you should find several examples if you look for threads where people talk about copying queues.



  • @jimp:

    I don't recall exactly what others have done, but that sounds similar. Search through the forum and you should find several examples if you look for threads where people talk about copying queues.

    I ran the shaper. I got the WAN queues, but none on the LAn interface. I manually created the hierarchy in the same structure for LAN ads it had for lan. I also compared it to one of my 1.2.3 installs. I then created my floating rules, but ALL traffic matched default in both directions. I'll look into it some more,

    At what point does a RC have a functional shaper? It's now at RC3 and it doesn't seem to be getting attention. Is it scheduled to be worked?


  • Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate

    It's something that will be addresses as soon as time allows. The dev who works on the shaper is off for a few days. We've had a lot of projects with time-sensitive deadlines around here, and though shaping is important, it has not been as important as fixing panics, CARP bugs, etc, etc. As we get closer to release it will of course be fixed, but that takes time (in both the sense of time to fix, and the availability of said time of someone who has the know-how to fix it).


Locked