Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 12:59:19 -0400 From: Dennis <dennis@etinc.com> To: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>, oppermann@pipeline.ch (Andre Oppermann) Cc: mike@smith.net.au, ulf@Alameda.net, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Packet/traffic shapper ? Message-ID: <199809111646.MAA05628@etinc.com> In-Reply-To: <199809111311.PAA19937@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> References: <35F92CE3.BC7AF153@pipeline.ch>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 03:11 PM 9/11/98 +0200, Luigi Rizzo wrote: >> > I suppose that you mean "the 2 best free solutions"? >> >> No, until you give me more technically detailed description of your >> BW manager product. > >well still it is not a free solution so the comment is correct :) >From what i have read about the Etinc product (and i'll be happy >to be corrected), it does something very similar to the >bandwidth-management part of dummynet, plus comes with support >being commercial software. Ours is a true bandwidth limiter (ie, specific types of traffic can be limited to very specific bandwidth specifications. ET/BWMGR can also operate with very high levels of traffic and with hundreds of limits with little overhead. > >> What I look for is an alternative for the standard FIFO queueing >> currently done in the BSD IP stack. You might know that bandwidth >> is quite expensive here in Europe and I'd like to drive my links >> up to 90% utilization. That is only possible if I have something >> like RED that does fair queueing on the FreeBSD routers, otherwise > >ALTQ might be for you then. In fact RED+WFQ would be not hard to >port to dummynet (and it is in my todo list but not at the top), >and the bw limiting of dummynet could be ported even more easily >to ALTQ, but there is one little difference between ALTQ and >dummynet: > > * ALTQ replaces the queueing management at the interface level, > so it has more feedback from the interface, at the price of having > to modify/recompile each driver. > * dummynet works at a higher level so the bandwidth is configured > "statically" and you can have queueing underneath. The advantage is > that you don't have to recompile the drivers, dummynet works even > on a ppp link. > >I have to say that if your machine is not directly on the bottleneck >link, or such link has constant bandwidth (e.g. does not use >compression etc.) then the difference is irrelevant apart from long >term drifts (but you can easily correct them). > >It remains as a fact that, as it is now, ALTQ implements WFQ and RED, >whereas dummynet does not. Doesnt dummynet run in user space? db Emerging Technologies, Inc. http://www.etinc.com ISA and PCI Sync Cards for FreeBSD, LINUX and BSD/OS Bandwidth Manager http://www.etinc.com/bwmgr.htm To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199809111646.MAA05628>