From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Nov 6 15:40:49 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA07806 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 6 Nov 1996 15:40:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from rah.star-gate.com (rah.star-gate.com [204.188.121.18]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA07801 for ; Wed, 6 Nov 1996 15:40:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from rah.star-gate.com (localhost.star-gate.com [127.0.0.1]) by rah.star-gate.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA12630; Wed, 6 Nov 1996 15:38:36 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199611062338.PAA12630@rah.star-gate.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 8/22/96 To: Terry Lambert cc: archie@whistle.com, jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com, hannibal@cyberstation.net, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Limiting bandwidth on a socket? (SO_RCVBUF?) In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 06 Nov 1996 16:21:28 MST." <199611062321.QAA09039@phaeton.artisoft.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 06 Nov 1996 15:38:36 -0800 From: Amancio Hasty Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >From The Desk Of Terry Lambert : > > What about kernel modifications? > > In a commercial environment it can be very beneficial to provide rate > > control. QOS --- that ugly old OSI term or more recently reservation > > bandwith services. > > That's only useful if your reservation is end-to-end, isn't it? Nope, the concept is useful to limit the rate for a given connection whether the connection is udp or tcp. Of course it helps if the other side also does rate limiting but we have to start somehere .... The other bit which you hinted at is monitoring . I would look around to see if snmp fits this requirement. if not create a FreeBSD specific mib to monitor the connections 8) ( I think that the tcp/ip mibs can do the job is just that I don't have the time to go fetch them and refresh my memory). Amancio