From owner-freebsd-isp Thu Apr 25 01:00:08 1996 Return-Path: owner-isp Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id BAA23616 for isp-outgoing; Thu, 25 Apr 1996 01:00:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sasami.jurai.net (root@sasami.jurai.net [205.218.122.51]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA23606 for ; Thu, 25 Apr 1996 01:00:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (winter@localhost) by sasami.jurai.net (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA07698; Thu, 25 Apr 1996 03:00:02 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 03:00:02 -0500 (CDT) From: "Matthew N. Dodd" X-Sender: winter@sasami To: Michael Dillon cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Bandwidth limited FTP server In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-isp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Thu, 25 Apr 1996, Michael Dillon wrote: > Does a Frame Relay switch need to be in the loop? Or can you run two > FreeBSD boxes back to back with ET cards in them to accomplish the same > thing, i.e. a T1 link with multiple DLCI's eah one with a different > bandwidth limit? Why not run an IP over IP tunnel b/t 2 boxes using the tun device and put sleep()'s in the userland program that implements the tunnel. Someone just posted some code that implements an IP over IP tunnel, and it shouldn't be too hard to make it throttle or just induce delay. Yay! The fearsome tunnel 'o lag. Or you could try underclocking your ethernet cards... (I've heard of some people in the linux camp that have done this...) Have a good one. | Matthew N. Dodd | winter@jurai.net | http://www.jurai.net/~winter | | Technical Manager | mdodd@intersurf.net | http://www.intersurf.net | | InterSurf Online | "Welcome to the net Sir, would you like a handbasket?"|