Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 00:43:18 -0700 From: "Freddie Cash" <fjwcash@gmail.com> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Understanding where dummynet fits into an ipfw ruleset Message-ID: <b269bc570806290043o349ae482wf923fd13952bbece@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.1080629155935.11273A-100000@gaia.nimnet.asn.au> References: <b269bc570806282234g3b9eaccdgeb85f70808f3357d@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.BSF.3.96.1080629155935.11273A-100000@gaia.nimnet.asn.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 11:22 PM, Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au> wrote: > It's not clear to me what's not working from your example rules above? I never said anything wasn't working. I was just looking for information to better understand how things work together, and to get a general feeling of where the queue rules would have to go. > Given using one_pass=1, that should go. And using one_pass=0, you > should only need to also add as say rule 150: > > 150 allow ip from 1.1.1.1 to 2.2.2.2 in recv em0 I'm starting to better understand how one_pass affects things. And I think I get, now, where to put the queue rules. I won't be doing any of the actual testing or implementation until July. I was just looking for more info on how to set things up. > > > Yes I suspect Freddie might want to use pipe rather than queue here too, > > > if just for bandwidth limitation rather than weighted queueing by type > > > of traffic? And is it only wanted for managing the inbound traffic? > > > > No, I want to use queue. I want to create rules to "reserve" > > bandwidth for connections to important servers, as we're moving to > > more web-based applications, and I want to make sure students surfing > > the web don't impact office staff. There will be a single pipe, with > > two queues, one weighted at twice the value of the other. That way, > > if there is no staff traffic, the students get the whole pipe. If > > there is no student traffic, staff get the whole pipe. And if there's > > a mix, then staff traffic is prioritised ahead of student traffic. > > Ok; on rereading your original, I should have realised that. So with a > similar set of rules for the other of staff/students that your above > example deals with, and the right pipe and queue configs, what remains > to do? Sorry to be thick, but I don't see why that wouldn't work .. I never said it wouldn't (or didn't) work. :) -- Freddie Cash fjwcash@gmail.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?b269bc570806290043o349ae482wf923fd13952bbece>