On Monday, May 29, 2006, at 10:48 US/Pacific, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
On 05/29/2006 07:02:40 AM, Steven Surdock wrote:
I found that cbq didn't borrow as aggressively as I expected.
Switching to the hfsc scheduler approached closer to what I wanted.
That does seem to be better, but I clearly am
Where can i find a more advanced schema on how PF is doing filtering
on each packet ?
Something like : interface -- in -- nat -- pf rules ... (
grapfical presentation of where and how each rule PF is acting on each
packet )
Thanks alot !
--
Key fingerprint = 9864 E575 E207 FB90 44C8 26A2
Nikolay Kalev wrote:
Where can i find a more advanced schema on how PF is doing filtering
on each packet ?
Something like : interface -- in -- nat -- pf rules ... (
grapfical presentation of where and how each rule PF is acting on each
packet )
Thanks alot !
Try:
On 05/29/2006 10:06:32 PM, Trevor Talbot wrote:
hfsc(linkshare) is what the bandwidth setting controls.
If hfc(linkshare) and bandwidth are the same thing,
then what happens if you specify both?
Karl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Free Software: You don't pay back, you pay forward.
--
On 05/29/2006 11:59:51 PM, Peter wrote:
I am running 3.8 with postfix and amavisd-new. I have noticed a large
number of postfix disconnections in my logs recently and I'm wondering
whether this is normal or not.
Postfix has a tarpit setting that delays initial SMTP replies
because spammers
On Tuesday, May 30, 2006, at 08:22 US/Pacific, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
On 05/29/2006 10:06:32 PM, Trevor Talbot wrote:
hfsc(linkshare) is what the bandwidth setting controls.
If hfc(linkshare) and bandwidth are the same thing, then what
happens if you specify both?
The hfsc(linkshare) value
