From owner-freebsd-pf@freebsd.org  Tue Mar 28 07:33:34 2017
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-pf@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18129D22D80
 for <freebsd-pf@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:33:34 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from emz@norma.perm.ru)
Received: from elf.hq.norma.perm.ru (mail.norma.perm.ru [IPv6:2a00:7540:1::5])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256
 bits)) (Client CN "mail.norma.perm.ru",
 Issuer "Vivat-Trade UNIX Root CA" (not verified))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CDC6DFD
 for <freebsd-pf@freebsd.org>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:33:32 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from emz@norma.perm.ru)
Received: from bsdrookie.norma.com. (net206-94.perm.ertelecom.ru
 [46.146.206.94] (may be forged))
 by elf.hq.norma.perm.ru (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id v2S7XPnX087693
 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO)
 for <freebsd-pf@freebsd.org>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:33:26 +0500 (YEKT)
 (envelope-from emz@norma.perm.ru)
To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org
From: "Eugene M. Zheganin" <emz@norma.perm.ru>
Subject: pf, ALTQ and 10G
Message-ID: <c04e8f0d-ae74-13c4-488a-b6a67826c802@norma.perm.ru>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:33:25 +0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spamd-Result: default: False [1.59 / 25.00] HFILTER_HOSTNAME_UNKNOWN(2.50)[]
 RBL_SPAMHAUS_PBL(2.00)[94.206.146.46.zen.spamhaus.org : 127.0.0.10]
 BAYES_HAM(-2.91)[99.63%] MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]
 R_SPF_SOFTFAIL(0.00)[~all] TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[] R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]
 FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[] RCPT_COUNT_1(0.00)[]
 DMARC_NA(0.00)[norma.perm.ru] RCVD_COUNT_1(0.00)[]
 TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[] FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]
 ONCE_RECEIVED(0.10)[] MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]
 RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS(0.00)[94.206.146.46.zen.spamhaus.org]
X-Rspamd-Server: localhost
X-Rspamd-Scan-Time: 0.52
X-Rspamd-Queue-ID: v2S7XPnX087693
X-BeenThere: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Technical discussion and general questions about packet filter
 \(pf\)" <freebsd-pf.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-pf>,
 <mailto:freebsd-pf-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-pf/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-pf@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-pf-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-pf>,
 <mailto:freebsd-pf-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:33:34 -0000

Hi.

I need to implement QoS on a 10G interface (ix(4)) with bandwidth of 4-5 
Gbit/sec. In general I'm using pf on FreeBSD, since I like it more than 
ipfw. But I'm aware that it's kind of ancient and wasn't updated for a 
long time from the upstream (and the upstream still doesn't support 
SMP). So, my question is - is it worth to stick to pf/ALTQ on 10G 
interfaces ? Will pf carry such traffic ?

Thanks.

Eugene.