Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 17:17:07 -0500 From: Mikhail Teterin <mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com> To: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> Cc: ugen@netvision.net.il, archie@dellroad.org, net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is there an API for ipfw? Message-ID: <200603311717.07894.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> In-Reply-To: <20060330140636.A98058@xorpc.icir.org> References: <200603301657.43218.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> <20060330140636.A98058@xorpc.icir.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
четвер 30 березень 2006 17:06, Luigi Rizzo написав: > If you are doing it a lot more often, you should probably > also consider the effect of such frequent changes to the > pipe's configuration - e.g. pipes respond with a delay > which is inversely proportional to the bandwidth, so in > many cases still doesn't make sense to change the pipe's > rate 100 times per second. So far I'm just playing with the rules manually. I create a pipe with: ipfw pipe 1 config bandwidth 22200KByte/s and send all NFS traffic through it with: ipfw add 100 pipe 1 ip from any to 172.21.128.43 dst-port 2049 This works most of the times, but if sometimes, when I try to change the bandwidth from command line: ipfw pipe 1 config bandwidth 24MByte/s the NFS clients stops writing ALTOGETHER and begins logging complaints about the NFS server (172.21.128.43) not responding. At that point, I must delete the rule 100. The other rules are simply: 65533 allow ip from any to any 65535 deny ip from any to any Why would altering the bandwidth slightly (up) freeze all traffic through the pipe? Thanks! -mi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200603311717.07894.mi%2Bmx>