Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 15:39:19 +0200 From: G Bryant <bsd@roamingsolutions.net> To: AT Matik <asstec@matik.com.br>, freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Subject: Re: route selection and ipfw forwarding Message-ID: <43B92D07.9010203@roamingsolutions.net> In-Reply-To: <200601021121.49433.asstec@matik.com.br> References: <43B875FD.6000102@gmail.com> <43B921A9.7070109@roamingsolutions.net> <43B926CC.6080101@roamingsolutions.net> <200601021121.49433.asstec@matik.com.br>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
AT Matik wrote:
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
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
natd IF/address (outside IP)
so if you do bw control for inside IPs you must do it on the inside interface
Joćo
Thank you for your input, but this setup is currently working
correctly.
This is a bit off the original topic though.
Do you have any specific questions I can help you with?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43B92D07.9010203>