From owner-freebsd-isp Mon Oct 12 19:17:15 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA06436 for freebsd-isp-outgoing; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 19:17:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from smtp.shellnet.co.uk (smtp.shellnet.co.uk [194.129.209.14]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id TAA06428 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 19:17:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from steven@shellnet.co.uk) Received: from dial-11-01.bolton.cspace.co.uk (dial-11-01.bolton.cspace.co.uk [194.128.147.27]) by smtp.shellnet.co.uk (8.9.1/8.9.1-shellnet.stevenf) with SMTP id DAA06860; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 03:17:21 +0100 (BST) Posted-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 03:17:21 +0100 (BST) From: steven@shellnet.co.uk (Steven Fletcher) To: danielj@wizard.com Cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ipltd, anyone? Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 02:15:57 GMT Message-ID: <3622b39e.2176307@smtp.shellnet.co.uk> References: <199810122157.OAA23973@snark.wizard.com> In-Reply-To: <199810122157.OAA23973@snark.wizard.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.5/32.452 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by hub.freebsd.org id TAA06432 Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, 12 Oct 1998 14:58:00 -800, you wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >I am looking for any real-world experiences with the ipltd daemon >by Cyril A. Vechera. I can simply say I've used it and been impressed with the results. We have had a few servers running bandwidth limited to 512Kbits - And guess what - A lovely straight 512K line on the graph on our MRTG :). > This daemon theoretically functions like the >Packeteer box, in that it will allow traffic to be limited over ethernet. It's not just limitation over ethernet, you can limit via IP source/destination address, port, protocol, network card, etc etc... as much configuration as IPFW allows you to give. >Does it function well? At all? There are other systems; DUMMYNET in particular, that from what I can make out is an integral part of the kernel - the fact that using dummynet you don't rely on a process to stay alive - However i've held back as applying "third-party" patches to ipfw doesn't appeal to me, especially since they didn't apply correctly when I tried :) For us, a combination of NATD, IPLTD and IPFW have worked perfectly without crash for over a month now since we started using it on an Intel p166 CPU, limiting 3 servers to 512k, providing an IP proxy to our offices, and also providing port translation, address translation *and* b/w limitation for our Quake servers - sometimes running at 700Kb/s for many hours on end. Is there any particular point you needed advice on or just wondering whether it worked at all ? :) >Thank you for any input. I Hope this helps >Daniel Jacobs Steven Fletcher steven@shellnet.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message