Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 21 Jan 2004 21:51:30 -0800 (PST)
From:      Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>
To:        "Daniel O'Connor" <doconnor@gsoft.com.au>, freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org, Ganbold <ganbold@micom.mng.net>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Bandwidth limiting for eMule ports
Message-ID:  <200401220551.i0M5pUdE018499@apollo.backplane.com>
References:  <6.0.1.1.2.20040122120552.0293bd20@202.179.0.80> <200401220546.i0M5kkPf018458@apollo.backplane.com>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help

:
:
:    Oops... sorry, I gave bad advise.  I'm looking at the code.  It recognizes
:    'K' or 'k' so your specification was right.  It's the 'b' verses 'B' that
:    it's sensitive to, so if you say:  kbytes/sec it will think it's kbits/sec,
:    and if you say kBits/sec it will think it's kBytes/sec.  
:
:    One thing I have noticed, however, is that the ipfw pipes seem rather
:    sensitive to configuration changes, especially if there are packets
:    already in the pipe.  I've never been able to pin it down.
:
:						-Matt

    Cripes, wrong again.  Batting 0 tonight!

    It does understand 'by', so it will do 'kbytes' or 'kBytes' or
    'KBytes' properly.  It doesn't understand 'KBits'.... it will
    think 'KBits' are actually KBytes.  It also has no clue about
    MBits... it will think that means MBytes.

    The code is aweful.  I think I'm going to rewrite it for DFly.

						-Matt



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200401220551.i0M5pUdE018499>