On 9/24/05, Mojo Jojo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OK, since I have most of PfSense setup the way I want, I am now ready to > dive into traffic shaping. > > Traffic shaping is a big reason we went with PFSense. > > We have a softswitch (Asterisk) on site behind our PfSense box. > > We are looking to do some QOS (traffic shaping) for our VOIP in and out of > softswitch/VOIP gateway. > > Currently if our bandwidth on our T1 gets soaked 1.55 mb or so, our calls go > to crap. > > Basically I want a few different ports and port ranges to always take > priority over anything else. The voice traffic should ALWAYS have priority. > > I tried using the traffic shaper wizard, I just checked the check box that > said "Prioritize VOIP", I left all defaults alone. I tried this experiment > at home where I only need SIP prioritized. My calls immediately went down > the toilet, could even understand anything on the call due to poor quality > and garbled voice.
That's cause the default is 32k. > I noticed if I tweaked the "Bandwidth:" setting under "VOIP specific > settings" from the default of 32k to 96k, my call was fine. Seems that this > makes sense since most of the VOIP stuff we use takes around 90k to work. > > So then, my problem is this.. How do I set this up in our office so that the > bandwidth is only reserved for VOIP calls when there are actually calls in > progress? > > I don't want to set this setting to say 1000k and have that 1000k > unavailable for data traffic when there is nobody on the phone. It won't be...that's a realtime guarantee, not a reservation. > Also, I assume the wizard only prioritizes the SIP port? Does it prioritize > any other ports like the IAX ports, RTP and so on? The asterisk setting prioritizes UDP 5060-5069 and UDP 10000-17226 (no idea why - SIP maybe?) > More than likely I just need a good tutorial for the traffic shaper > beginner. > > Is it just me or is the traffic shaper outside of the wizard the most > confusing thing ever? Just wait until you see the code :-/ And I've already rewritten it twice..I'm working on the third rewrite of that code. --Bill
