From owner-freebsd-isp Thu May 14 22:16:40 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA10260 for freebsd-isp-outgoing; Thu, 14 May 1998 22:16:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from labinfo.iet.unipi.it (labinfo.iet.unipi.it [131.114.9.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA10234; Thu, 14 May 1998 22:16:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it) Received: from localhost (luigi@localhost) by labinfo.iet.unipi.it (8.6.5/8.6.5) id FAA01765; Fri, 15 May 1998 05:31:30 +0200 From: Luigi Rizzo Message-Id: <199805150331.FAA01765@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> Subject: Re: Bandwidth limiter available To: mike@smith.net.au (Mike Smith) Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 05:31:30 +0200 (MET DST) Cc: andre@pipeline.ch, manar@ivision.co.uk, isp@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199805142303.QAA00334@antipodes.cdrom.com> from "Mike Smith" at May 14, 98 04:03:19 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > Manar Hussain wrote: > > > > Use ALTQ: http://www.csl.sony.co.jp/person/kjc/programs.html#ALTQ > > > > Does dynamic BW limiting better than a static ipfw rule. > > I can attest to this, having actually watched it in action. and i fully agree on this. Just want to comment that dummynet and ALTQ are two different things, that maybe could be integrated together at some point. I do think that ALTQ is a more complete package. On the other hand, the advantages of dummynet are, in my opinion, the following: * ability to simulate delays and packet losses; this is very useful for experiments, less useful for real-life apps :) * device-indipendent, since it works at the IP level; ALTQ works at a lower level so it needs to be aware of the interface (and this could be a problem in some cases). * uses ipfw for packet filtering, which makes it easier to configure things (for those already familiar with ipfw). Also, it might save some work since classification is done once both for queueing and firewalling purposes. The latter are probably design choices that ALTQ might benefit from as well. (if you want to compare sizes, the dummynet patches to the kernel are about 1/10 of the size of ALTQ patches; but ALTQ includes also an ATM device driver and other stuff, so the comparison is not very meaningful). > If you want to hear more about ALTQ, Cho Kenjiro will be talking about it > at USENIX this year. We hope also to hear from Ito Jun-ichiro about and just for the records, I have a paper at the FreeNIX track on dummynet and related networking stuff. cheers luigi -----------------------------+-------------------------------------- Luigi Rizzo | Dip. di Ingegneria dell'Informazione email: luigi@iet.unipi.it | Universita' di Pisa tel: +39-50-568533 | via Diotisalvi 2, 56126 PISA (Italy) fax: +39-50-568522 | http://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/ _____________________________|______________________________________ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message