Sat, 9 Jan 2016 17:45:01 +0200 Mihai Popescu
> Where is the enlightment gone?
In proofreading the queuing FAQ and updating the best current practice,
thank Marko for bravely trying to understand and apply it with the risk
of being insulted unjustly.
Line 59
[http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvs
On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 21:57:15 +1000
David Gwynne wrote:
> the other thing to note is that loading a ruleset resets the
> assignment of existing states to queues.
>
> states are assigned to queues via rules, but if the rules go away
> (which is what happens when you load a new ruleset) the intermed
> On 15 Jan 2016, at 9:07 PM, Craig Skinner wrote:
>
> On 2016-01-15 Fri 12:53 PM |, David Gwynne wrote:
>>> On 13 Jan 2016, at 19:19, Marko Cupa?? wrote:
>>>
>>> Have we come to conclusion that currently prio makes no sense at all?
>>
>> it wont have the effect you want. that doesn't mean it doe
On 2016-01-15 Fri 12:53 PM |, David Gwynne wrote:
> > On 13 Jan 2016, at 19:19, Marko Cupa?? wrote:
> >
> > Have we come to conclusion that currently prio makes no sense at all?
>
> it wont have the effect you want. that doesn't mean it doesn't make sense
> somewhere else.
>
Such as an ADSL PPP
> On 13 Jan 2016, at 19:19, Marko Cupać wrote:
>
> On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:40:58 +0100
> Claudio Jeker wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 05:33:06AM -0700, Daniel Melameth wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 9:37 PM, David Gwynne
>>> wrote:
> On 11 Jan 2016, at 22:43, Daniel Melameth
> w
> Ok, let's start insult each other.
No insult intended from my side and no one commited.
> I've setup my first PF on OpenBSD in 2006.
As Master Fu said once, if you can't setup it by yourself, maybe you
should not use it.
> Stuck your advice up your ass and fuck off.
I'm curious who will dear
> I'm writing this so I don't get another set of mails which warn me I
> can't shape inbound, but need to shape outbound traffic.
Hello Marko,
Don't you think you are out of subject with this thread already?
Now, seriously, do you expect someone to teach you queues online?
Maybe the PF implement
On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 16:36:23 +0200
Mihai Popescu wrote:
> > I'm writing this so I don't get another set of mails which warn me I
> > can't shape inbound, but need to shape outbound traffic.
>
> Hello Marko,
>
> Don't you think you are out of subject with this thread already?
> Now, seriously, do
On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 10:19:22 +0100
Marko Cupać wrote:
> Can I hope that saying 'currently' means this is not the intended
> design? Or should I come to peace with the fact that with OpenBSD and
> PF I can forget about shaping inbound TCP traffic in a way that
> child queues can expand to max lin
On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:40:58 +0100
Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 05:33:06AM -0700, Daniel Melameth wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 9:37 PM, David Gwynne
> > wrote:
> > >> On 11 Jan 2016, at 22:43, Daniel Melameth
> > >> wrote: On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Marko Cupa??
>
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 05:33:06AM -0700, Daniel Melameth wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 9:37 PM, David Gwynne wrote:
> >> On 11 Jan 2016, at 22:43, Daniel Melameth wrote:
> >> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Marko Cupa??
> wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 11:11:27 -0700
> >>> Daniel Melameth
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 9:37 PM, David Gwynne wrote:
>> On 11 Jan 2016, at 22:43, Daniel Melameth wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Marko Cupać
wrote:
>>> On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 11:11:27 -0700
>>> Daniel Melameth wrote:
You NEED to set a max on your ROOT queues.
>>> I came to this con
On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:37:49 +1000
David Gwynne wrote:
> prio is basically an array of lists of packets to be transmitted. high
> priority packets go on a different list to low priority packets.
> the problem is the way packets go on and off these lists. basically
> as soon as a packet is queue
> On 11 Jan 2016, at 22:43, Daniel Melameth wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Marko Cupać wrote:
>> On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 11:11:27 -0700
>> Daniel Melameth wrote:
>>> You NEED to set a max on your ROOT queues.
>> I came to this conclusion as well. But not only on root queues. For
>> examp
On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 11:11:27 -0700
Daniel Melameth wrote:
> >> You NEED to set a max on your ROOT queues.
> > I came to this conclusion as well. But not only on root queues. For
> > example, when max is set on root queue but only bandwidth on child
> > queues, no shaping takes place...
>
> This wo
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Marko Cupać wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 11:11:27 -0700
> Daniel Melameth wrote:
>> You NEED to set a max on your ROOT queues.
> I came to this conclusion as well. But not only on root queues. For
> example, when max is set on root queue but only bandwidth on child
On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 11:11:27 -0700
Daniel Melameth wrote:
> You NEED to set a max on your ROOT queues.
I came to this conclusion as well. But not only on root queues. For
example, when max is set on root queue but only bandwidth on child
queues, no shaping takes place:
queue upload on $if_ext
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 6:35 PM, Marko CupaÄ wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 11:13:08 -0500
> sven falempin wrote:
>
> > You will need to forward the all rule set i think, maybe the set prio
> > 0 is erased by a further rules, try to pass in quick those p2p
> > traffic before maybe ?
>
> I had the l
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Marko Cupać wrote:
> I am setting up gateway for a small network which has two main types of
> traffic: p2p and http(s). The idea is to give p2p traffic all the
> available bandwidth until there is http(s) traffic, in which case p2p
> should be throttled down and h
--
Before queue - p2p high priority, http(s) low priority, no bad self
image on the misc@.
After queue - p2p high priority, http(s) low priority, bad self image
on the misc@.
Where is the enlightment gone?
> Situation is still the same: torrents being downloaded at full speed
> (~8Mbit/s), simultaneous download of install59.fs from ftp.openbsd.org
> averages at ~6Kbit/s.
I'm not a PF consultant, but be aware that p2p can be a real beast to
setup. I was asked by someone to handle a double NAT situati
Thanks to everyone who contributed to this thread. Replies were not
what I hoped for, but I still appreciate I didn't get just silence.
My claims about the issue were:
- setting prio as per manpage instructions does not throttle
lower-priority traffic
- setting bandwidth on queues as manpage ins
On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 11:13:08 -0500
sven falempin wrote:
> You will need to forward the all rule set i think, maybe the set prio
> 0 is erased by a further rules, try to pass in quick those p2p
> traffic before maybe ?
I had the luxury of ditching the complete ruleset for very simple one:
---pf.c
On 8 януари 2016 г. 17:51:21 Marko Cupać wrote:
I am completely confused. It seems that everything I've known about
queueing in PF does not apply any more, while at the same time there are
no reliable sources to learn new stuff.
Let's follow this paragraph from 'Book of PF':
---quote---
Shapi
I am completely confused. It seems that everything I've known about
queueing in PF does not apply any more, while at the same time there are
no reliable sources to learn new stuff.
Let's follow this paragraph from 'Book of PF':
---quote---
Shaping by Setting Traffic Priorities
If you’re mainly in
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Marko Cupać wrote:
> Should I conclude my goal of throttling smaller priority traffic to
> minimum when higher priority traffic arrives can't be achieved with
> current PF? If I haven't gone senile, I did this successfully on dozens
> of firewalls back in altq/HFS
On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 22:41:47 + (UTC)
Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2016-01-07, Marko Cupać wrote:
> > # QUEUES
> > queue upload on $if_ext bandwidth 860K
> >queue ack parent upload qlimit 50 bandwidth 10K
> >queue fast parent upload qlimit 50 bandwidth 20K
On 2016-01-07, Marko Cupać wrote:
> # QUEUES
> queue upload on $if_ext bandwidth 860K
>queue ack parent upload qlimit 50 bandwidth 10K
>queue fast parent upload qlimit 50 bandwidth 20K
>queue bulk parent upload qlimit 50 bandwidth 800K default
>queu
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 1:28 PM, Marko CupaÄ wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am setting up gateway for a small network which has two main types of
> traffic: p2p and http(s). The idea is to give p2p traffic all the
> available bandwidth until there is http(s) traffic, in which case p2p
> should be throttled d
29 matches
Mail list logo
