Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 13:38:28 -0700 From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> To: Ludo Koren <lk@tempest.sk> Cc: tscrum@aaawebsolution.com Subject: Re: limiting bandwith Message-ID: <20040414133828.A16025@xorpc.icir.org> In-Reply-To: <200404142019.i3EKJEmT081498@lk106.tempest.sk>; from lk@tempest.sk on Wed, Apr 14, 2004 at 10:19:14PM %2B0200 References: <001201c4223f$ad443930$6466a8c0@wolf> <200404142019.i3EKJEmT081498@lk106.tempest.sk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Apr 14, 2004 at 10:19:14PM +0200, Ludo Koren wrote: > > > > > Using keep-state "is" the most efficient way to do it. The > > config that I sent would still allow smtp and pop through, but > > limited as to the weight of the queue. Maybe I am > > misunderstanding what you are saying. > > > Are you saying that the mail is traversing unabated by the > > ruleset? > > No. It seems, when I am using the rule with keep-state flag, each > packet is counted twice. So if I set bw to 256Kbit/s, I get only > 128Kbit/s. Luigi wrote, in keep-state rules there are not valid in, > out, xmit, rule flags, if I understood him correctly... i said a different thing, please re-read my msg carefully. and i am done with this thread, sorry! luigi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040414133828.A16025>