Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 11:21:49 -0200 From: AT Matik <asstec@matik.com.br> To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Subject: Re: route selection and ipfw forwarding Message-ID: <200601021121.49433.asstec@matik.com.br> In-Reply-To: <43B926CC.6080101@roamingsolutions.net> References: <43B875FD.6000102@gmail.com> <43B921A9.7070109@roamingsolutions.net> <43B926CC.6080101@roamingsolutions.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 02 January 2006 11:12, G Bryant wrote: > I used the different groups (e.g. $u512k) to split the internal IP range > into IP groups that get different bandwidth according to personal > preference or whatever. > Currently it is not being used as the whole range is being covered by > the $u256k group. i.e. I gave everyone 256k bandwidth. > So yes - those rules are currently senseless. > none of your bw rules are having any effect because the related IPs do not= =20 exist on you external/outside interface of the server you divert them so any of the internal IP is reperesented by the IP of the= =20 natd IF/address (outside IP) so if you do bw control for inside IPs you must do it on the inside interfa= ce Jo=E3o A mensagem foi scaneada pelo sistema de e-mail e pode ser considerada segura. Service fornecido pelo Datacenter Matik https://datacenter.matik.com.br
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200601021121.49433.asstec>