On Sun, 21 Mar 2004, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2004 at 12:56:08PM -1000, Vincent Poy wrote:
> ...
> > > the above configuration means that if queue 1 is getting a bandwidth
> > > X, then queue 2 will get 0.99X, queue 3 will get 0.98X, queue
> > > 4 will get 0.97X. Hardly matching any re
On Sat, Mar 20, 2004 at 12:56:08PM -1000, Vincent Poy wrote:
...
> > the above configuration means that if queue 1 is getting a bandwidth
> > X, then queue 2 will get 0.99X, queue 3 will get 0.98X, queue
> > 4 will get 0.97X. Hardly matching any reasonable definition of high-mid-low
> > priority!
>
On Sat, 20 Mar 2004, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> cannot comment on the reason for the huge delay (but one
> way to check what is going on is to change the pipe's bandwidth
> and see if anything changes), but i see a big
> misunderstanding on weights vs. priorities in your
> configuration:
The de
cannot comment on the reason for the huge delay (but one
way to check what is going on is to change the pipe's bandwidth
and see if anything changes), but i see a big
misunderstanding on weights vs. priorities in your
configuration:
> # Define our upload pipe
> ${fwcmd} pipe 1 config bw 48
On this subject, I have one of my own... I have a
6.016Mbps/608kbps ADSL connection with 8 static IP's from my ISP. I'm
using the FreeBSD box to basically limit my upstream bandwidth to 480kbps
so that the downloads would work while uploading. In my kernel, I do have
the following option
