PF + ALTQ - Bandwidth per customer

[eculp]

Quoting Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy at optushome.com.au>:

> On 2008-Dec-02 10:42:27 +0200, Andrei Kolu <antik at bsd.ee> wrote:
>>> That description sounds like it simplifies to "limit bandwidth based on
>>> IP address" - which is fairly trivial for ipfw+dummynet or pf+altq.
>>>
>> ipfw+dummynet is really ugly traffic "shaper" (let's face it there is no
>> shaping going on), because instead of limiting bandwidth it will drop
>> packets to simulate bad connection.
>
> I've been using ipfw+dummynet for traffic shaping for 7 or 8 years
> without problems (and have recently moved to pf+dummynet).  I don't
> understand your comment about limiting bandwidth: An incoming packet
> is put on a queue that is emptied at no more than the (simulated)
> available outbound bandwidth.  If the queue is full then incoming
> packets will be dropped.  This is the same behaviour as any other
> router (or switch).
>
> What do you want/expect?
>
>> I hear many years about "trivial"
>> configuration per user bandwidth limit with pf+altq but never saw ANY
>> code...
>
> Note that I never mentioned per-user bandwidth with pf+altq - though
> it looks possible.  There are some trivial traffic-shaping examples in
> pf.conf(5) but I will admit that I've never tried to actually use altq
> - I use dummynet because I need functionality that isn't present in
> altq.

I had forgotten that dummynet can be used with pf. Maybe i should  
start this with a new subject but it is directly related in that I  
need bandwidth control again that I don´t have since changing to pf.

   o- What needs to be patched/done to make them work together
      on Current and Releng?
   o- Are you happier with the combination of dummynet with pf
      than with IPFW?

DummyNet was one of the reasons that I was slow to leave IPFW.

Thanks and I am really not trying to hijack this thread, be glad to  
start a new one.

ed