Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
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 +0200
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: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040414133828.A16025>