From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 3 21:21:34 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D94FD16A420 for ; Mon, 3 Oct 2005 21:21:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from arne_woerner@yahoo.com) Received: from web30310.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web30310.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.200.103]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4DDF543D48 for ; Mon, 3 Oct 2005 21:21:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from arne_woerner@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 84977 invoked by uid 60001); 3 Oct 2005 21:21:33 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=hQUuKVx6txhkLBTnqFUCzRQzZhAEb1Tju5Vh77FBWZFv5CHocKaUvF0sIYsDLWOJWYFxz65D7fuRmxh4vUiMRWwNvL7hSZhP/hJ+ukF1Yirz+5pwqQQNwM3UOiz4zufn54UJiW3KhOXkVqeBVSbb0kOmqdsSBMSqEdRELwZRsnc= ; Message-ID: <20051003212133.84975.qmail@web30310.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [213.54.67.241] by web30310.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 03 Oct 2005 14:21:33 PDT Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 14:21:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Arne "Wörner" To: Max Laier , freebsd-net@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <200510032246.57786.max@love2party.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Subject: Re: pf / queue+stateful / r generated rules assigned to the right queue? X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 21:21:35 -0000 Dear Max, Thank u for ur answer... --- Max Laier wrote: > 1) One can only queue *OUT*going traffic > 2) All unclassified outgoing traffic ends up in the default > queue > 3) Don't forget about 1) > Hmm... Isn't it possible to tell the sender of a stream to slow down? In case of TCP I could think of a quite easy way to do so: 1. ipfw does it... 2. I would just delay the processing of the packet by the packet filter after the apropriate rule has been identified as long as necessary to reach the right bandwidth ratio... 3. Right now I did it with ipfw... Seems to work... Although it looks like up to 20 packets are waiting for the right bandwidth... Maybe the server even re-sends some packets, when the TCP-handshaking is missed? So I should do the traffic shaping on the server side? Since this seems to be more TCP/IP related, I would like to keep this in the -net@ list... Bye Arne __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com