Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:27:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Rich Wilson <wk633@yahoo.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: dummynet Message-ID: <20010912232725.56328.qmail@web12301.mail.yahoo.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, I'm trying to set up a basic bandwidth control. I have a dual homed box, 172.16.1.250 and 172.16.2.251 with hosts at 172.16.1.1 and 172.16.2.4 (both Win2K). I run: ipfw add pipe 1 ip from any to any out ipfw add pipe 2 ip from any to any in ipfw pipe 1 config bw 64Kbit/s queue 10Kbytes ipfw pipe 2 config bw 64Kbit/s queue 10Kbytes but according to IPerf (http://dast.nlanr.net/Projects/Iperf/) I'm getting aprox 400KBytes/s. Performance monitor on the IPerf server box confirms that much traffic coming in. I tried chaning the pipe add rules to specify the two host IPs, one rule for each direction, both 'out', and got the same result. Playing with the queue size didn't have any effect either. If I double the bandwidth (change the 64s to 128s) I do get an approximate doubling of reported bandwidth. I know ipfw is restricting bandwidth, it's just not doing it to the degree I think it should. According to my math, at 64 and 128 Kbits/sec, I should get less than 8 and 16 KBytes/sec, a far cry from 400 and 800 KBytes/s. (yes, but IPerf and Win Performance Monitor are reporting Bytes, not bits) Can anyone please point to something patently stupid that I'm doing? ===== : __o : -\<, : 0/ 0 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010912232725.56328.qmail>