From owner-freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 9 23:48:33 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E954F106566B for ; Sun, 9 Sep 2012 23:48:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lobo@bsd.com.br) Received: from mail-yw0-f44.google.com (mail-yw0-f44.google.com [209.85.213.44]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59FB58FC14 for ; Sun, 9 Sep 2012 23:48:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by yhq56 with SMTP id 56so333986yhq.17 for ; Sun, 09 Sep 2012 16:48:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:organization :x-mailer:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :x-gm-message-state; bh=P/8szp6cqFZdAQSdMXM3Efv8+m3pw7Je5wMSUVvH6uA=; b=RH1b92VwMikpe1TQ1O+7IhyKqj8hCh/aaTHm4EtNASer0G5173P/WLYMtrLuT6C+zE fah+7Wiep7cujFAGWJYTTGO3HmSr8SfEa/7l9zqVbAxjOhMHZRe8YtsZHwBlQJT0/DbO MItQx+FkFiRJVy0gLmpnJKT0XLHBC/g3t7sbnttC19j23huBZ3rs3atfeGrmvLSQ+Yvq Mc7sO7Fz+MApsivqIeYk1iWbdAsBhywpMPTFQv5brhoCZvXPW8yyqdoXALPUReYlRzMZ LvACxYlVWgfVJgY4FBwySYo8Uk2rytuxYS3Ejrt36P/mAVJJhXUF7A818/qk6CKdUstH 4xdw== Received: by 10.236.140.67 with SMTP id d43mr10427612yhj.19.1347234505201; Sun, 09 Sep 2012 16:48:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from papi ([177.158.148.115]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l1sm21634828yhm.19.2012.09.09.16.48.23 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 09 Sep 2012 16:48:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2012 20:49:20 -0300 From: Mario Lobo To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20120909204920.51697435@papi> In-Reply-To: References: <20120905115140.GF15915@FreeBSD.org> <50476187.8000303@gibfest.dk> <20120905183607.GI15915@glebius.int.ru> <20120906064640.GL15915@glebius.int.ru> Organization: BSD X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.6; amd64-portbld-freebsd8.3) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn0hiq1pN1F4RZuXPkIKdh9a0WZPtYT9tswbaTAUK+B8lxgLjsijhfUZY6+DTdHvOzrNw4S Subject: Re: [HEADS UP] merging projects/pf into head X-BeenThere: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Technical discussion and general questions about packet filter \(pf\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2012 23:48:33 -0000 On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 17:12:52 +0000 (UTC) "Bjoern A. Zeeb" wrote: > > Everyone agrees that altq needs to vanish, we know other code > exists/has been pondered; we'll see who might come forward. > > /bz > Forgive my lame question. I'm just a simple user and I've been using altq in pf for a good while and it has just been doing a good job (as far as I can see, which may not be as far as it should be seen) on a double wan (setfib) machine. True, I don't have a big ext network load and the 2 links are just 1M and 2M, with 210 rules loaded, lots of rdrs, rtables route-tos, 2 luscas,1 VBox VM server. Never had a single panic on this machine. FreeBSD ALLENFW 8.2-STABLE #0: Tue Nov 29 11:35:28 BRT 2011 amd64 Is it possible to explain (quickly, if you must) why altq needs to vanish? Thanks, -- Mario Lobo http://www.mallavoodoo.com.br FreeBSD since 2.2.8 [not Pro-Audio.... YET!!] (99% winblows FREE)