From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 4 16:33:15 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85E8016A4CE for ; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 16:33:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from postfix3-2.free.fr (postfix3-2.free.fr [213.228.0.169]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E125743D60 for ; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 16:33:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tataz@tataz.chchile.org) Received: from tatooine.tataz.chchile.org (unknown [82.233.239.98]) by postfix3-2.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9880C07D; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 17:33:13 +0100 (CET) Received: by tatooine.tataz.chchile.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 76A5D412C; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 17:31:58 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 17:31:57 +0100 From: Jeremie Le Hen To: Gilbert Tsang Message-ID: <20041204163157.GZ79919@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> References: <008c01c4d96d$fba8c1a0$f18011ac@gtsang3> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <008c01c4d96d$fba8c1a0$f18011ac@gtsang3> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ALTQ integration and FreeBSD 4.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 16:33:15 -0000 > After more than a day's mail-archive reading and FreeBSD 4.10 source > code browsing, I don't think ALTQ has been integrated into 4.x branch > (I know it is for the 5.x branch). Is that correct? I was wondering if > some folks would know the status of ALTQ on FreeBSD 4.x; alternatively > I'd appreciate patches to try out if you know one (there's an old one > at ). > Any related info apprecaited. Thanks. About two years ago, I looked at ALTQ on FreeBSD 4.x. Although the patch compiles properly, there is one point that made me give it up : since this ALTQ version is not bound to any firewall framework, it does use it own packet matching engine which is - IMHO - very poor. As far as I can remember, you may indeed only match IP addresses and port numbers while I wanted to give a high priority to tiny ACK packets and a very low priority to non-interactive ssh session (matching the TOS field in IPv4 header). Regards, -- Jeremie Le Hen jeremie@le-hen.org