On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 08:55:07 -0400
Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 4:10 AM, Gregory Edigarov
g...@bestnet.kharkov.ua wrote:
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 08:53:46 +0100
Bret S. Lambert bret.lamb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 09:47:35AM +0200, Gregory
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 11:17:56 +0400
ZZ Wave zzw...@gmail.com wrote:
What solution should be used for traffic shaping on real-life,
production gateways with tens and hundreds users? PF queues seem to
be too userspace-ish and CPU consuming.
Pardon?
What do you mean userspace-ish ?
--
With best
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 09:47:35AM +0200, Gregory Edigarov wrote:
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 11:17:56 +0400
ZZ Wave zzw...@gmail.com wrote:
What solution should be used for traffic shaping on real-life,
production gateways with tens and hundreds users? PF queues seem to
be too userspace-ish and
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 08:53:46 +0100
Bret S. Lambert bret.lamb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 09:47:35AM +0200, Gregory Edigarov wrote:
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 11:17:56 +0400
ZZ Wave zzw...@gmail.com wrote:
What solution should be used for traffic shaping on real-life,
For example, in FreeBSD there is slow pf in userspace and fast
kernel-level netgraph.
2011/11/1 Gregory Edigarov g...@bestnet.kharkov.ua
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 11:17:56 +0400
ZZ Wave zzw...@gmail.com wrote:
What solution should be used for traffic shaping on real-life,
production gateways
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 12:26:30PM +0400, ZZ Wave wrote:
| For example, in FreeBSD there is slow pf in userspace and fast
| kernel-level netgraph.
This isn't a FreeBSD list. This is OpenBSD - pf is in the kernel.
And besides .. do you think the cpu runs slower when it's executing
userland code ?
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 12:26:30PM +0400, ZZ Wave wrote:
For example, in FreeBSD there is slow pf in userspace and fast
kernel-level netgraph.
*headasplode*
2011/11/1 Gregory Edigarov g...@bestnet.kharkov.ua
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 11:17:56 +0400
ZZ Wave zzw...@gmail.com wrote:
What
ah, you mean nat? In OpenBSD all firewall functions (uhmm, almost all,
to be technically correct, in the presence of [t]ftp-proxy) i.e. packet
filtering, NAT, shaping are done on the kernel level.
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 12:26:30 +0400
ZZ Wave zzw...@gmail.com wrote:
For example, in FreeBSD there
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 9:26 AM, ZZ Wave zzw...@gmail.com wrote:
For example, in FreeBSD there is slow pf in userspace and fast
kernel-level netgraph.
And what has this to do with OpenBSD?
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 4:10 AM, Gregory Edigarov
g...@bestnet.kharkov.ua wrote:
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 08:53:46 +0100
Bret S. Lambert bret.lamb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 09:47:35AM +0200, Gregory Edigarov wrote:
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 11:17:56 +0400
ZZ Wave zzw...@gmail.com
ZZ Wave zzw...@gmail.com writes:
For example, in FreeBSD there is slow pf in userspace and fast
kernel-level netgraph.
Wow, I can scarcely imagine a single sentence that reveals more
thoroughly and conclusively how little familiarity you have with any of
the systems you mention.
Hint: both pf
ZZ Wave zzw...@gmail.com writes:
What solution should be used for traffic shaping on real-life, production
gateways with tens and hundreds users? PF queues seem to be too
userspace-ish and CPU consuming.
PF setups with various altq disciplines are serving sites with larger
user bases than
12 matches
Mail list logo
