From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Feb 23 9:18:54 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B6BB11166 for ; Tue, 23 Feb 1999 09:18:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from phate1@ix.netcom.com) Received: (from smap@localhost) by dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) id LAA23112; Tue, 23 Feb 1999 11:17:18 -0600 (CST) From: phate1@ix.netcom.com Received: from nyc-ny71-37.ix.netcom.com(209.109.226.229) by dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3) id rma023021; Tue Feb 23 11:16:39 1999 Message-ID: <002a01be5f50$3995e5e0$e5e26dd1@dialup.phate.com> To: "Luigi Rizzo" Cc: Subject: Re: Software bandwidth limiting solution Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 12:16:14 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG ipfw add 10000 pipe 1 tcp from 80 to any ipfw pipe 1 config bw 5Mbits/s queue 10 anyway you look at it, if it the limiting starts to work, I start to go up in mbufs.. I don't know who's responsible for it.. ? If I just use a simple ipfw rule, it works, I don't lose any mbufs, but a combination with dummynet, if it works, it means my box will reboot later on :) So I have to remove the ipfw rule, before my mbufs go dangerously high, and as soon as I remove it, mbufs drop from 7500 or so to like 1500 (their normal).. Mike -----Original Message----- From: Luigi Rizzo To: Mike Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Date: Tuesday, February 23, 1999 3:42 AM Subject: Re: Software bandwidth limiting solution >> Checking versions... >> >> FreeBSD 3.0-STABLE #10: Tue Feb 2 15:08:13 EST 1999 >> >> ip_fw.c: >> $Id: ip_fw.c,v 1.103 1998/12/31 07:43:29 luigi Exp $ >> >> ip_dummynet.c >> $Id: ip_dummynet.c,v 1.7 1999/01/12 16:43:52 eivind Exp $ >> >> ip_output.c >> $Id: ip_output.c,v 1.85 1998/12/21 21:36:40 luigi Exp $ > >ok you are basically up to date except for the recent fix to ip_output. > >> my rules are basically >> >> ipfw pipe 1 config bw 5Mb/s queue 0 >> >> or >> >> ipfw pipe 1 config bw 5Mb/s queue 10 plr 0.010 > >you still don't say how you divert things to pipe 1 . The plr is there >just for testing, in a production network you don't want to arbitrarily >drop packets unless a queue fills up. > >> either way sooner or later mbufs are exhausted.. > >frankly i am not sure at all it is dummynet fault. are you sure you >don't have something else eating mbufs ? i have read several msgs >complaining about mbuf leaks recently, but none of them was about >dummynet. > > cheers > luigi >-----------------------------------+------------------------------------- > Luigi RIZZO . > EMAIL: luigi@iet.unipi.it . Dip. di Ing. dell'Informazione > HTTP://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/ . Universita` di Pisa > TEL/FAX: +39-050-568.533/522 . via Diotisalvi 2, 56126 PISA (Italy) >-----------------------------------+------------------------------------- > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message