Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:38:32 +0300 From: Martes Wigglesworth <martes.wigglesworth@earthlink.net> To: Matej Puntar <matej.puntar@guest.arnes.si> Cc: ipfw-mailings <freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: advanced bandwidth limiting Message-ID: <1098607107.89582.26.camel@Mobile1.276NET> In-Reply-To: <417B5950.9070403@guest.arnes.si> References: <417AC21F.1030905@guest.arnes.si> <417B5950.9070403@guest.arnes.si>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nope. This method escapes the "keep-state" trap, which runs the traffic through twice, one up, and once down. That is not desireable, since it will limit a packet on the in recv, and out xmit stages. I just use explicit route definitions, to avoid this bottleneck, because it will give the enduser half of the specified bandwidth, or in the worst case, I have seen it devided by four. Hope this helps. -- M.G.W. Wiggtekmicro, Corp. System: Asus M6N Intel Dothan 1.7 512MB RAM 40GB HD 10/100/1000 NIC Wireless b/g (not working yet) BSD-5.2.1 KDE-3.1.4
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1098607107.89582.26.camel>