On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Stuart Henderson s...@spacehopper.org wrote:
1. Don't use different _in and _out names, use syntax like queue foo on em0
and queue foo on em1. That way you assign packets to the correct queues on
both interfaces in one step with something like match to port 53
On 2014/09/05 03:49, Abel Abraham Camarillo Ojeda wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Stuart Henderson s...@spacehopper.org wrote:
1. Don't use different _in and _out names, use syntax like queue foo on
em0
and queue foo on em1. That way you assign packets to the correct queues on
* Andy a...@brandwatch.com [2014-08-05 18:06]:
Correct me if I'm wrong here Henning, but we have always used the approach
of only ever assigning queues to the physical interface (whether it has
VLANs or not), as this means that both the physical interfaces untagged
network, plus all the tagged
* Giancarlo Razzolini grazzol...@gmail.com [2014-08-05 18:36]:
On 05-08-2014 03:36, Henning Brauer wrote:
the 90s are over.
Yep, I know Henning. Vlan's are pretty secure. But they add complexity
and if you use physical separation you can mitigate problems caused by
misconfiguration. Either
Am Dienstag, den 05.08.2014, 17:05 +0100 schrieb Andy:
Considering all this, there should never be a good reason to apply
queues to the VLAN interfaces at all?
Well, there may be. For example a VLAN may indeed just represent a port
on a switch elsewhere. Where a certain policy applies (e.g.
On 06-08-2014 05:34, Henning Brauer wrote:
Your preferences are your preferences, you're free to do that - just
like you're free to stab a knife in your eye.
Not sure I'd go with this analogy. Here in my country things are a
little different. Not always the networks are correctly configured.
On 2014-08-04, Eric Dilmore ericdilm...@gmail.com wrote:
I just set up a new OpenBSD 5.5 gateway for a small nonprofit. The
gateway has one external interface and one internal, with the internal
network split into several VLANs: one for secure traffic, one for
guests, one for internal phones,
* Giancarlo Razzolini grazzol...@gmail.com [2014-08-05 00:02]:
On 04-08-2014 18:09, Eric Dilmore wrote:
I just set up a new OpenBSD 5.5 gateway for a small nonprofit. The
gateway has one external interface and one internal, with the internal
network split into several VLANs: one for secure
On 2014 Aug 04 (Mon) at 19:01:06 -0300 (-0300), Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
:On 04-08-2014 18:09, Eric Dilmore wrote:
: I just set up a new OpenBSD 5.5 gateway for a small nonprofit. The
: gateway has one external interface and one internal, with the internal
: network split into several VLANs: one
Am Dienstag, den 05.08.2014, 08:36 +0200 schrieb Henning Brauer:
queueing on vlan is pretty meaningless.
however, classification can happen anywhere, so assign queues on your
vlan interface and create them on the physical one, things will Just
Work (tm).
Strangely, the following
* David Dahlberg david.dahlb...@fkie.fraunhofer.de [2014-08-05 10:17]:
Am Dienstag, den 05.08.2014, 08:36 +0200 schrieb Henning Brauer:
queueing on vlan is pretty meaningless.
however, classification can happen anywhere, so assign queues on your
vlan interface and create them on the
On 05/08/14 10:23, Henning Brauer wrote:
* David Dahlberg david.dahlb...@fkie.fraunhofer.de [2014-08-05 10:17]:
Am Dienstag, den 05.08.2014, 08:36 +0200 schrieb Henning Brauer:
queueing on vlan is pretty meaningless.
however, classification can happen anywhere, so assign queues on your
vlan
On 05-08-2014 03:36, Henning Brauer wrote:
the 90s are over.
Yep, I know Henning. Vlan's are pretty secure. But they add complexity
and if you use physical separation you can mitigate problems caused by
misconfiguration. Either on OpenBSD itself or on the switches. As I
said, my personal
On 04-08-2014 18:09, Eric Dilmore wrote:
I just set up a new OpenBSD 5.5 gateway for a small nonprofit. The
gateway has one external interface and one internal, with the internal
network split into several VLANs: one for secure traffic, one for
guests, one for internal phones, and one for our
Thank you for the reply, Giancarlo. There are some things I'm not quite
sure about from your response, however.
prio sounds great on paper, but I'm pretty sure they are a per-interface
priority queue. Could it still prioritize packets from the Asterisk vlan
above those from other vlans?
Also, I
Eric Dilmore [ericdilm...@gmail.com] wrote:
Thank you for the reply, Giancarlo. There are some things I'm not quite
sure about from your response, however.
prio sounds great on paper, but I'm pretty sure they are a per-interface
priority queue. Could it still prioritize packets from the
On 04-08-2014 19:17, Eric Dilmore wrote:
prio sounds great on paper, but I'm pretty sure they are a per-interface
priority queue. Could it still prioritize packets from the Asterisk vlan
above those from other vlans?
Yes, it is per-interface. But the prio is applied on the dequeuing. You
can
17 matches
Mail list logo
