Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 18 Sep 2002 21:08:23 +0100 (BST)
From:      Byron Schlemmer <freebsd-questions@byron.me.uk>
To:        Kirk Strauser <kirk@strauser.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD-Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Traffic shaping - current best practice?
Message-ID:  <20020918210512.Y348-100000@pan.home>
In-Reply-To: <87elbri05i.fsf@pooh.int>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 18 Sep 2002, Kirk Strauser wrote:

> I know that someone asks this question every now and then, but it's the kind
> of thing that can change over time, so I ask again:
>
> I want to use a FreeBSD firewall to provide bandwidth guarantees to
> customers.  Specifically, several hosts will be sharing a 512Kbps pipe.
> Some of those hosts are no-cost (read: no service commitment on my part),
> but I may be taking on clients who would be paying for a guaranteed rate
> (said rate being substantially less than 512Kbps).
>
> I'm looking for a solution that would allow the non-paying hosts to have
> full use of the bandwidth as long as the paying hosts are idle, but which
> would ensure that the paying customers have their full bandwidth available
> any time they need it.
>
> I've used both ipfw and ipfilter.  I have no particular preference, although
> a solution that supports bridging would be a bonus (which I think will limit
> me to ipfw, but I'm not certain).
>
> Any suggestions?

Best practice? Well I'm not sure what that would be but to accomplish
most of this see 'man dummynet'. Very easy to setup and highly
configurable. Also /usr/share/doc/en/articles/filtering-bridges and
/usr/share/doc/en/books/handbook/bridging.html might prove insightful.

Hope that helps some.

	- byron


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020918210512.Y348-100000>