Patrick Tracanelli wrote:
eculp escreveu:
Quoting Mike Makonnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Daniel Dias Gonçalves wrote:
You will go to develop a version to work with PF ?
I don't know what's needed to get it to work with pf, but if it's
not too
much work, sure.
That would be great, Mike. I'm seeing more and more bandwidth being
used with p2p that I haven't been able to control with pf. The
thought has entered my mind to change back to ipfw that I used for
many years before changing to pf maybe 3 years ago. I also found
dummynet to be easy and practical to set up for both incoming and
outgoing connections. Something else I haven't figured out how to do
the same with altq, if even possible. In fact, if I am able to
control p2p with pf I may not even need bidirectional bandwidth limits.
Thanks for sharing your very practical solution to a real world
problem. Have a great weekend.
If it could be rewritten as a netgaph node, maybe it could tag the
classified packets, and tagging be compatible with both pf and ipfw
(under discretionary user choice with configuration switchs), so both
ipfw or pf could be used.
I'll look into this when I have time.
However a lot of work has to be done before. It works better on i386
than amd64 right now, wont compile on RELENG_6 without modifying some
gcc tweaks, etc.
Do you have a patch :-) ? Barring that, can you email me a copy of the
build output?
I hope enhacing it can be a GSoC project in the future, or we
(community) can raise some funds to make it happen faster. It is
really a long-time needed feature to FreeBSD.
Cheers.
--
Mike Makonnen | GPG-KEY: http://people.freebsd.org/~mtm/mtm.asc
mtm @ FreeBSD.Org | AC7B 5672 2D11 F4D0 EBF8 5279 5359 2B82 7CD4 1F55
FreeBSD | http://www.freebsd.org
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
