Jeremie Le Hen
jeremie at le-hen.org
Tue Sep 20 12:37:19 PDT 2005
> I know what is WF2Q, but still dont see what is the problem for wich
> dont't exist a possibility to limit bandwidth that is given to a
> queue, with queue settings.
> And exist a precedent, "queue" paramater that exist for pipe and
> For example, if a "bw" parameter is not used for queue, then bandwidth
> is given only acording with they weight, so use this option who want,
> like anothers parameters ("dst-ip, mask, queue, even weight").
> And my suggestion isn't a caprice.
> For example: if i have multiple users, that acces internet throught an
> freebsd gateway. How split bandwidth?
> I have two clear solutions:
> 1. assign for each host an pipe. But i dont know if in this mode, in
> conditions of heavy traffic, bandwidth is well splited. Is possibil
> for an user to take more bandwidth (according with his pipe), and
> another user remain without bandwidth.
> 2. share total bandwidth, to different hosts, with queue. This is more
> efficient but have a little problem. If an user is alone on traffic
> can get all bandwith. For this reason, i want (and i think many
> admins) an possibility to limit bandwidth that is given to a queue.
> I don't think that passing packets to multiple pipe and queue is e
> efficiently for traffic flow.
> My sugestion about "bw" parameter for queue is only for convenience. U
> can named how you want, so i dont see problem about "... pipes and queues are two distinct objects which have
> different semantics."
You definitely want to use ALTQ, which is available since RELENG_5.
Dummynet is not designed to achieve traffic management, its intent
is to emulate a network.
ALTQ will allow you to share bandwidth in a very fair way, such as
you describe here.
Jeremie Le Hen
< jeremie at le-hen dot org >< ttz at chchile dot org >
More information about the freebsd-ipfw