From owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 1 00:34:23 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 777F0106566C for ; Tue, 1 Dec 2009 00:34:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kudzu@tenebras.com) Received: from smtp104.prem.mail.sp1.yahoo.com (smtp104.prem.mail.sp1.yahoo.com [98.136.44.59]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3FE398FC0A for ; Tue, 1 Dec 2009 00:34:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 33375 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2009 00:34:22 -0000 Received: from adsl-69-109-229-187.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net (kudzu@69.109.229.187 with plain) by smtp104.prem.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Nov 2009 16:34:22 -0800 PST X-Yahoo-SMTP: AcwmMA.swBBRnMzwDJMDF.V04AMorA-- X-YMail-OSG: ss1DaoEVM1k_MtclHLb66b8UkksWMNLromreLDrkMMu9iJgtVoxwjFL6M8QWWzuxJgsQhw_9MWJVfEu_POyhQjfbe.cBCNhqYARXFwJFUPknDqQPH8a8jiRFC1.rYKnhqAl6VPXOjJbHLxmopjuUlAWxZ7_D440vdtMgLMtmG9oL_DvSrXOcKyPyl.TPVWkUIq9DavpfGnRdUnQeOk5Ht0.YzRV0IV8NOUyj4TnWGCmU6OxERYiSP1VTOHVE2bKy7EDlzhOueNrg_8zadoE7bKyPAxoIM8vKZnu8ZrESIM8bAD0QkjBWMtPXwv9CSRSZGsrY3r1iu_C6ZD4roC3sctvbTlO30NIx5RJj9hB5mp4- X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 Message-ID: <4B14648D.8090507@tenebras.com> Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:34:21 -0800 From: Michael Sierchio User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <4B129960.9030107@gmail.com> <4B12B6B9.3030106@bsd.com.br> <4B12C32F.3060709@gmail.com> <4B12C543.2070204@mgwigglesworth.net> <4B141A77.4030102@gmail.com> <20091130201222.GC72710@lath.rinet.ru> <20091130234537.GA78185@lath.rinet.ru> In-Reply-To: <20091130234537.GA78185@lath.rinet.ru> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Re: dummynet issues X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: kudzu@tenebras.com List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:34:23 -0000 Oleg Bulyzhin wrote: > On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 03:38:50PM -0500, Ben Kelly wrote: >> I've also run into the problem recently on 9-CURRENT (last synced on 11/13/2009). My configuration looks like: >> > > My quick attempt to reproduce the issue failed. Perhaps i'm missing something. > > How are you measuring connection bandwidth? > Just an aside - queue weights only come into play when queues are full. If you don't specify the queue size in terms of entries as opposed to bytes, you may not get the behavior you expect with small packets. What's your nominal connect rate in each direction? Your pipe should be that size or smaller, of course. Another aside - in practice, bulk traffic is at MTU size, and interactive packets or naked TCP ACKs are small. iplen alone is sufficient for the packets you want to assign a lower weight. -- Michael Sierchio +1 415 378 1182 PO Box 9036 Berkeley CA 94709 US kudzu@tenebras.com