Re[2]: dummynet patch

Yes, thanks! But is a little redundant and confused to pass packets to multiple pipe and queue. Isn't more elegant to put an option on queue that limit maximum bandwitdth to that queue (like "bw" option for pipe)? I dont know programming (not well), but i think that, can do the job, if is put an su

multiple incoming lines

Hi all, I hope someone can help me with a routing / Natd / ipfw problem i'm having. Setup description: 1x FreeBSD 5.4 3x NIC's: 1x LAN, 2x connected to external DSL modems int_if - LAN ext_if1 - ISP1 ext_if2 - ISP2 Both dsl modems use NAT too, so it is a nat - nat, but did have it working for a

Re: dummynet patch

Hi, > Yes, thanks! But is a little redundant and confused to pass packets to > multiple pipe and queue. Isn't more elegant to put an option on queue > that limit maximum bandwitdth to that queue (like "bw" option for pipe)? > I dont know programming (not well), but i think that, can do the job, >

Re: multiple incoming lines

U have (for set 2) this rules to divert packets that outgoing: $cmd 10050 set 2 divert natd2 ip from any to any out via $ext_if1 $cmd 10050 set 2 divert natd2 ip from any to any out via $ext_if2 I dont understand what u want to do? This rules translate all adress that outgoing throught $ext_if1 and

Re: multiple incoming lines

G Bryant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Setup description: > 1x FreeBSD 5.4 > 3x NIC's: 1x LAN, 2x connected to external DSL modems > int_if - LAN > ext_if1 - ISP1 > ext_if2 - ISP2 > > Both dsl modems use NAT too, so it is a nat - nat, but did have it > working for a single external line.

Re[2]: dummynet patch

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 queue. For example, if a "bw" parameter is not used for queue, then band

Re: dummynet patch

On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 07:20:26PM +0300, vladone wrote: > 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. it not implemented because there is an equivalently efficient mechanism w

Re: multiple incoming lines

Thanks for the help. I am trying to do load-balancing using 2 ISP's. Mostly traffic from the LAN. I will look at possible routing, but don't see how I can manipulate outgoing packets to split the outgoing load between the two external NIC's. Anybody done this before? Thanks Gray vladone wrot

Re: IPFW2+NAT stateful rules VS. FTP

Hi all, I am not sure, if my post came here before, so I try again. Please, sorry if I re-post the same, but I still can not make it work. - Original message- Thanks for the reply but... > If you use "passive mode" FTP, that ought to work

Re: IPFW2+NAT stateful rules VS. FTP

On Sep 20, 2005, at 1:55 PM, Peter Rosa wrote: If you use "passive mode" FTP, that ought to work fine. If you use "active mode" FTP, you ought to use the FTP proxying built into NATD (see the -use_sockets and -punch_fw options), which is aware of the FTP data channel. Please, could you be litt

Re: dummynet patch

Hi, > 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 > queue. > For example, if a "bw" parameter is not used for