From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 3 14:45:23 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C8B537B401 for ; Tue, 3 Jun 2003 14:45:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.nsu.ru (mx.nsu.ru [212.192.164.5]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3A1443F93 for ; Tue, 3 Jun 2003 14:45:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fjoe@iclub.nsu.ru) Received: from mail by mx.nsu.ru with drweb-scanned (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19NJdV-0007Sh-00; Wed, 04 Jun 2003 04:48:05 +0700 Received: from iclub.nsu.ru ([193.124.215.97] ident=root) by mx.nsu.ru with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19NJcv-0007Kf-00; Wed, 04 Jun 2003 04:47:29 +0700 Received: from iclub.nsu.ru (fjoe@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by iclub.nsu.ru (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h53Lhv5Q011625; Wed, 4 Jun 2003 04:43:58 +0700 (NSS) (envelope-from fjoe@iclub.nsu.ru) Received: (from fjoe@localhost) by iclub.nsu.ru (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h53Lhv0j011624; Wed, 4 Jun 2003 04:43:57 +0700 (NSS) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 04:43:57 +0700 From: Max Khon To: Mike Porter Message-ID: <20030603214357.GA11462@iclub.nsu.ru> References: <1054583721.3edbaba959c81@webmail.ownij.com> <200306031535.15107.mupi@mknet.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200306031535.15107.mupi@mknet.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-Envelope-To: mupi@mknet.org, bigtruck@ownij.com, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000001, version=0.11.1.4 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-134.6 required=5.0 tests=BOGOFILTER_TEST_PASS,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO, QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,QUOTE_TWICE_1,REFERENCES, REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_MUTT,USER_IN_WHITELIST version=2.50 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) cc: bigtruck@ownij.com cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 4.8-Stable DummyNet X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2003 21:45:23 -0000 hi, there! On Tue, Jun 03, 2003 at 03:35:08PM -0600, Mike Porter wrote: > > Hi. We just opened a gaming center and have chosen to run a FreeBsd box > > for our firewall. IPFW is configured at it's very basic running natd > > through rl0 and allowing any to any connections from the lan to the outer > > world. Natd controls access to the lan. > > > > We have a 6.0 mb/s ADSL net connection for all the gaming clients to use, > > however if a gamer starts downloading a file, that file takes precendence > > and causes everyone's pings 'in-game' to sky rocket to unplayable levels. > > I have done some reading on DummyNet which is attached at the hip with > > IPFW, however I have been unsuccessful in getting it to work properly. > > > > I have done some research and found this site: > > http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/ip_dummynet/ > > > > After reading I became more confused than before. Should I share the link > > as a whole to all 64 client machines OR should I set a fixed BW for all > > client machines. Are there other websites out there that can help with > > this? > > > > Also if and when I do find a working pipe/queue config do I put it before > > the natd via rl0 command or after? > > Another consideration, from experience: rl is not a very good "inside" nic, > at least if running with the old standby 8139 chip. I don't have direct > experience with the 82xx family they are using these days, but with my > 8139-based card, I could never, under windows, get a single download past > 30KBps (but I could open 3 downloads before the performance started to fall > off) (this is on a cable modem). Under BSD (4-stable in the days of 4.5 and > 4.6) I couldn't get anything past 100Kbps. Using a machine with two > realtek's as a gateway/router, I found I was brealy better than dialup on my > local machines. Switching to a Netgear NIC (dc driver) vastly improved > matters. When set for dc0=outside, rl0=inside, my LAN performance is about > the same (indicating a bottleneck in rl0), however, my WAN performance is > about 1/3 better (I can consistently get 130KBps+, and frequently exceed > 200KBps; once in a while I can even get more than 300KBps, but due to the > nature of cable, that is pretty rare.). Putting dc0 on "inside" duty more > than doubles the performance of my LAN, without changing any network > infrastructure. This tells me the rl8139 at least is optimized for use on > asymetric connection, such as DSL or Cable, and is not really (even though it > claims to support it) a full-duplex card. Spend a few dollars more, and get > a better card, in other words. I have performance problems with these cards under win2000 (probably poorly written driver) but under FreeBSD I get 10Mb/s (megabytes/s) via NFS between two FreeBSD machines (two 8139c cards, crossover). /fjoe