Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2012 20:49:20 -0300 From: Mario Lobo <lobo@bsd.com.br> To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HEADS UP] merging projects/pf into head Message-ID: <20120909204920.51697435@papi> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1209091708580.13080@ai.fobar.qr> References: <20120905115140.GF15915@FreeBSD.org> <50476187.8000303@gibfest.dk> <20120905183607.GI15915@glebius.int.ru> <CAPBZQG0a4WVB4W4OwF3CAJH-G4DTDan-Nz1HR1SFAgFOfe%2Ba=Q@mail.gmail.com> <20120906064640.GL15915@glebius.int.ru> <CAPBZQG1iQ31bxMkKOKUUFpfOt15YMxgx1hmnj3HsQSj%2B%2BGJYqw@mail.gmail.com> <E1T9upR-0000bK-SI@clue.co.za> <CAPBZQG2b1AAdNBT9NVve8kzzxF%2Bu2T5Kgs10jO92nmZegvWebw@mail.gmail.com> <E1T9xJ9-0000pZ-Mg@clue.co.za> <CAPBZQG1W=Hqt%2BPQtGMmBvd84fWvgMPyMr1cONsOh4DQnRoyH8w@mail.gmail.com> <CAM-i3ihE7RJPHq9ru4ECNB=JVMuYC=CypqngX=yW1oekmcJQkw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1209091708580.13080@ai.fobar.qr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 17:12:52 +0000 (UTC) "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> 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)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120909204920.51697435>