On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 17:12:52 +0000 (UTC) "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Everyone agrees that altq needs to vanish, we know other code > exists/has been pondered; we'll see who might come forward. > > /bz >
Forgive my lame question. I'm just a simple user and I've been using altq in pf for a good while and it has just been doing a good job (as far as I can see, which may not be as far as it should be seen) on a double wan (setfib) machine. True, I don't have a big ext network load and the 2 links are just 1M and 2M, with 210 rules loaded, lots of rdrs, rtables route-tos, 2 luscas,1 VBox VM server. Never had a single panic on this machine. FreeBSD ALLENFW 8.2-STABLE #0: Tue Nov 29 11:35:28 BRT 2011 amd64 Is it possible to explain (quickly, if you must) why altq needs to vanish? Thanks, -- Mario Lobo http://www.mallavoodoo.com.br FreeBSD since 2.2.8 [not Pro-Audio.... YET!!] (99% winblows FREE) _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-pf To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
