Hi, i am running 1.2.3 and I need some ideas on how to limit and prioritize
traffic
This is the setup
internet ---10Mbps---MainFirewall
(NAT)---1000Mbps---pfSense(NAT)1000Mbps---1600 wireless clients
|
Hi.
I have seem to reach a point whereby I understand the Traffic Shaper /
queue's functions. (Atleast I think I do). [image: Wink]
Although with specific data like torrent data, it seems not able to handle
it right. It always goes to default queue, no matter firewall settings.
But when default
If anybody cab share config sample is highly appreciated
--Original Message--
From: Chris Buechler
To: support@pfsense.com
ReplyTo: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic shaper and radius
Sent: Dec 17, 2010 11:32 AM
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 11:17 PM, Budi wibowo bwib
Hi
is it possible radius send trigger to pfsense. Based on that trigger pfsense
create traffic shaper rule as response to radius request.
Thx
Budi
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 11:17 PM, Budi wibowo bwib...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok I know pfsense has captive portal. and as I know it only has per user
bandwidth restriction, which means all user will get same bandwidth
allocation.
How to differentiate bandwidth allocation if I want to allocate x mb
Hi,
I have traffic shaper issue (that will be for the most of us).
I have one SDSL 1/1mbit, and one VDSL PPPoE connection (as thus, this
is the WAN, and the SDSL being the OPT1).
When using the traffic shaper wizard, and defining the SDSL (OPT1) as
being 1024/1024 - it also shapes my VDSL to a
Hi,
I was wondering, if there is a manual way of defining the traffic
shaper, instead of using the wizard ?
I actually just would like to assign just 128kbit to all SMTP traffic
(in/out, don't care) - and the rest is permitted like it is.
I could run the wizard, delete all rules afterwards
Networks, LLC
Phone: 206-577-3078
supp...@atlasnetworks.usmailto:supp...@atlasnetworks.us
www.atlasnetworks.ushttp://www.atlasnetworks.us
From: Michel Servaes [mailto:mic...@mcmc.be]
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 7:01 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: [pfSense Support] traffic shaper, manual howto
I am experiencing the same issue at my side...i have 3mbit symmetric and i
had set UP/Down to 200kbit...in the start every thing was stopped...i used
tcpdump on my LAN side but my Pfsense was not listening to anything...then a
reboot fixed it but the problem mentioned by -Jeppe- remains same...i
Are you saying that once you rebooted, the shaper worked as expected with
the 200 kbit limit?
Regards,
-Jeppe
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 1:29 AM, Abdulrehman arvagabo...@gmail.com wrote:
I am experiencing the same issue at my side...i have 3mbit symmetric and i
had set UP/Down to 200kbit...in the
I'm having some issues with the traffic shaper after switching to 1.2.2.
Basically I was noticing that the RRD quality graph was showing pings of 1
second when there was a lot of bandwidth being used on the line.
I don't remember seeing that issue when I was on the old version.
I started
Hello! Is anyone successfully running a traffic shaper with priority being
given to an OpenVPN tunnel? I understand that the traffic IN a tunnel cannot be
shaped, but the tunnel itself can be shaped. I tried this on a 1.2-RELEASE
installation and the end result was that I simply hosed the
Hi there,
I have just ran the Traffic shaper wizard and I have a doubt about the
queues generated and the bandwidth assigned to the different queues.
Considering the wan queues and the bandwidth assigned to them, qwandef(1%),
qwanacks(25%), qPenaltyUp(1%), qOthersUpH(25%) and qOthersUpL(1%), I
Hi Jose,
As what I understand, 1% is the minimum allocated bandwidth. If the
remaining 99% is not used by other queues, this queue may still use up
all 100% of the bandwidth.
In the implementation, if no queues are defined with upper limit, all
100% bandwidth may still be used up. On the
Good morning all,
I am wondering what I should see on the queues status page when a
SIP-AIX2 call is placed. I used the traffic shaper wizard, the Trixbox sits
on it's own network and was specified in the wizard config. I have had some
voice quality issues on my AIX2 trunk to VOIPstreet
On 3/26/08, Curtis LaMasters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I setup trixbox at my home with Teliax as my VoIP provider with relative
ease. However, I though it would be a good idea to QoS the traffic to and
from my asterisk server. When I did so, the voice became very choppy. I
used the traffic
Hello,
I am building a new system with new hardware and I
think the better thing is to trash the old config and
do a new one. I'd like to try Traffic Shaper, but I
get little information and I've lots of doubts,
especially regarding its limits and possible side
effects on daily usage. I'd really
Hi,
I use asterisk behind PfSense, and I configured the traffic shaper
accordingly. I can see that it prioritizes SIP and RTP traffic. Is
there a reason why IAX traffic (UDP/4569) is not included in there?
Regards,
Ugo
] On Behalf Of Ugo Bellavance
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 7:55 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: [pfSense Support] Traffic shaper, asterisk and IAX (port 4569)
Hi,
I use asterisk behind PfSense, and I configured the traffic
shaper
accordingly. I can see that it prioritizes SIP and RTP
Greetings list,
I have a couple of locations that want to set up unsecured wireless networks
for use by clients whilst visiting for net access. They're going to run the
WLAN on a separate LAN interface off their pfSense box so it's kept safely away
from the rest of their network.
They do not
Escaño [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 11:21 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper
Thank you Bill.
Bill Marquette wrote:
On 3/14/07, Pablo Montoro Escaño [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe HFSC has a limitation of 64 queues compiled
: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 2:02 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper
On 3/13/07, Kelvin Chiang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, is there a document somewhere that I can read and understand about
the mechanism for Traffic Shaper? Or if someone can verify whether
: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 2:02 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper
On 3/13/07, Kelvin Chiang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, is there a document somewhere that I can read and understand about
the mechanism for Traffic Shaper? Or if someone can verify whether
Hi Bill, one more questions. Does the traffic shaper work if the LAN
interface is Bridged to the WAN interface?
Regards,
Kelvin
-Original Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 9:17 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support
Anyone knows whether the traffic shaper work if the LAN interface is
Bridged to the WAN interface?
Regards, Kelvin
-Original Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 9:17 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic
with the WAN interface? May
be the attachment can explain my question.
Regards,
Kelvin
-Original Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 2:02 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper
On 3/13/07, Kelvin
On 3/15/07, Kelvin Chiang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bill, one more questions. Does the traffic shaper work if the LAN
interface is Bridged to the WAN interface?
It won't work correctly. This has been discussed on the lists and in
the forums in the past. Some people claim it works for them,
Thank you Bill
-Original Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 10:02 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper
On 3/15/07, Kelvin Chiang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bill, one more questions. Does the traffic
I believe HFSC has a limitation of 64 queues compiled in
by default so beware that you don't go past that.
Could anyone confirm this?
Does this apply only to parent queues, or is the total number of queues?
Anyway of configuring more queues?
Thanks in advanced.
Bill Marquette wrote:
On
On 3/14/07, Pablo Montoro Escaño [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe HFSC has a limitation of 64 queues compiled in
by default so beware that you don't go past that.
Could anyone confirm this?
Yes
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/contrib/altq/altq/altq_hfsc.h?annotate=1.1.1.1
Thank you Bill.
Bill Marquette wrote:
On 3/14/07, Pablo Montoro Escaño [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe HFSC has a limitation of 64 queues compiled in
by default so beware that you don't go past that.
Could anyone confirm this?
Yes
On 3/13/07, Kelvin Chiang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, is there a document somewhere that I can read and understand about the
mechanism for Traffic Shaper? Or if someone can verify whether my concept is
right:
1. Before anything can be defined, we must first define a pair of Parent
Queues,
associated with Queue
definitions? I try to understand Scheduler Options and Service
Curve.
Regards,
Kelvin
-Original Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 2:02 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper
On 3/13/07
@pfsense.com'
Subject: RE: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper
Hi Bill,
Thank you for the replies, it has been very helpful. For clarification:
For Item 6: When you said that it does nothing, did you mean thet the
Direction field in traffic shaping rules does nothing at all? Whether
it is any
On 3/13/07, Kelvin Chiang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bill,
Thank you for the replies, it has been very helpful. For clarification:
For Item 6: When you said that it does nothing, did you mean thet the
Direction field in traffic shaping rules does nothing at all? Whether
it is any, in and out?
On 3/13/07, Kelvin Chiang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bill,
I realized the error message associated with the traffic shaping rules
was caused by the script (that writes the rule files onto the disk)
called when the user press the Save button in the traffic shaping rule
definition page.
The
, 2007 9:17 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper
On 3/13/07, Kelvin Chiang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bill,
I realized the error message associated with the traffic shaping rules
was caused by the script (that writes the rule files onto the disk)
called
Hi Bill, sorry to trouble u again... How many Parent Queues can we
define?
-Original Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 9:17 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper
On 3/13/07, Kelvin Chiang [EMAIL
On 3/13/07, Kelvin Chiang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bill, sorry to trouble u again... How many Parent Queues can we
define?
All queues have to tie back into the root queues, which are parent
queues, outside of that, there shouldn't be any limitations. It's
useful to note that the wizard
Reread the thread [pfSense Support] Some traffic from IP going into
wrong queue and then take a look at
http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,1384.0.html .
On 12/3/06, Josep Pujadas i Jubany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello!
I used Traffic Shaper Wizard to assign small bandwith to P2P
Hello
I got one problem with pfSense.
I use 1.0.1 version. I didn't use another one.
When i go to Traffic Shaper, i m automatically redirected to
wizard.php?xml=traffic_shaper_wizard.xml which is the setup wizard.
After i fill it, the wizard start again and again, i can't even see my
, November 14, 2006 5:19 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: [pfSense Support] Traffic shaper wizard starts
automatically, all the time
Hello
I got one problem with pfSense.
I use 1.0.1 version. I didn't use another one.
When i go to Traffic Shaper, i m automatically redirected
Hey guys--
Grats on release.
I noticed in the changelog the following:
PF does not know about congestion flags, remove from shaper
What does that mean?
Also, I still have a customer who is running a pre-release version with
a traffic shaper enabled WITH bridging, and the traffic shaping
On 10/30/06, Dimitri Rodis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey guys--
Grats on release.
I noticed in the changelog the following:
PF does not know about congestion flags, remove from shaper
What does that mean?
It is a TCP flag. It never worked to begin with.
Also, I still have a customer who
On 10/30/06, Dimitri Rodis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey guys--
Grats on release.
I noticed in the changelog the following:
PF does not know about congestion flags, remove from shaper
What does that mean?
It means we allowed an option on the front side that PF didn't
support. I caught it
On 10/30/06, Bill Marquette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Glad it works for them.Shaping has never been known to work withbridging.It's not that it _doesn't_ work, it's more that it wasn'tcoded in such a way to be fully compatible.It'll shape something insome direction, but I make no guarantees as to
Hey all,
I have trolled through the archives and the forum but have not found a
definite answer on my question.
Here is my setup. I am currently running pfsense on a Dual Wan setup. I
have a bonded T-1 line in one interface (3 Megs total) and a T-1 on the
other side (1.5 Meg).
I
I will retest with Beta2. I had the same results that John reported
with Vonage lines. I only had to test it with one of the lines.
Robert
On Sat, 2006-02-25 at 17:18 -0600, Bill Marquette wrote:
Thanks for the update. I just spent a number of hours on the shaper
and think I found the
On 2/27/06, Robert Goley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will retest with Beta2. I had the same results that John reported
with Vonage lines. I only had to test it with one of the lines.
Robert
Thanks...the workarounds kinda suck IMO and we're still seeing issues
on WRAPs (but not all of
I am running the PC version installed to a HD. I have 3 3com 3c905
cards(bc's I think). It is a P II 450 with a 10 GB IDE drive. It has
over 3??MB of RAM. I was running 2-19-06 and 2-19-06 with the latest
update tarball applied.
Robert
On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 13:39 -0600, Bill Marquette wrote:
On 2/27/06, Charles Sprickman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since I was bitching about Vonage, I'll be sure to grab the latest
snapshot and see what happens.
Of note, I know that we're still not getting stuff in the right queues
- I've been sidetracked with this much larger issue. So, don't be
Finally got around to testing the shaper again today with
VoIP on snapshot 02-19-06.
Tried several things but I could not make it work.
Setup is as follows:
4mbit/800kb cable modem, nothing else connected but a wrap
pfsense and 1 phone.
Phone is using SIP to connect to a remote
Thanks for the update. I just spent a number of hours on the shaper
and think I found the problem. This does appear to be an OS level bug
but I've sort of worked around it in our config. Beta 2 is just
around the corner, the fixes, which require the wizard to be re-run
(I've enforced this for
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper - VoIP
Thanks for the update. I just spent a number of hours on the shaper
and think I found the problem. This does appear to be an OS level bug
but I've sort of worked around it in our config. Beta 2 is just
around the corner, the fixes, which
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 6:18 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper - VoIP
Thanks for the update. I just spent a number of hours on the shaper
and think I found the problem. This does appear to be an OS level bug
but I've sort
Gah, patch command isn't in the wrap version... Guess I will need to wait
for the img...
John
-Original Message-
From: John Cianfarani [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 8:02 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: RE: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper - VoIP
I'm
You've horribly butchered bits vs bytes. Everything in the shaper
wizard is in bits. A 6Mb connection is 6Megabits, not 6MegaBytes,
hence the 600KByte download (notice the conversion I did?) FYI, if
you have 5 lines, you probably want to reserve 5 x line rate - if line
rate is 96Kb/sec then you
Alright, I have been schooled on connection terms I will look up
more later. I have more of a hands on knowledge of these things and
butchered it because of that. That you for the information on how to
set the traffic shaper. I knew that I would have to adjust for the
multiple lines. I
So is the traffic shaper working correctly now for voip in the latest
snapshot?
Thanks
John
-Original Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 12:28 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper hints needed
-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 12:28 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper hints needed.
You've horribly butchered bits vs bytes. Everything in the shaper
wizard is in bits. A 6Mb connection is 6Megabits
@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper hints needed.
As far as we know yes. Bill has put out repeated pleas for testing
and feedback but nobody seems to care.
Scott
On 2/21/06, John Cianfarani [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So is the traffic shaper working correctly now for voip
to begin testing it.
Thanks
John
-Original Message-
From: Scott Ullrich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 1:11 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper hints needed.
As far as we know yes. Bill has put out repeated pleas
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper hints needed.
You've horribly butchered bits vs bytes. Everything in the shaper
wizard is in bits. A 6Mb connection is 6Megabits, not 6MegaBytes,
hence the 600KByte download (notice the conversion I did?) FYI, if
you have 5
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper hints needed.
You've horribly butchered bits vs bytes. Everything in the shaper
wizard is in bits. A 6Mb connection is 6Megabits, not 6MegaBytes,
hence the 600KByte download (notice the conversion I did?) FYI, if
you have 5 lines, you probably want
As for as the traffic shaper testing, what do you want to specifically test? I had a rule previously on the M0n0wall that included all traffic TCP/UDP/etc from the vonage routers IP addresses. Do you want the default protocol rules, the new changes for IP address/Alias, or is it even limited
Test that it works.
Make a phone call (or 2). Then start putting load on the internet
connection. If all goes well you should be able to saturate the
internet connection and be able to maintain and VOIP conversation (or
2).
On 2/21/06, Robert Goley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As for as the
On 2/21/06, John Cianfarani [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where are they put out? I never saw anything on the list/blog/ or
pfsense homepage?
In just about every traffic shaper related thread in either the lists
or the forums (which I rarely visit - the list is the best place to
get my attention).
Bill Marquette wrote:
Along those lines, I'm working on hacking together an embedded OpenBSD
version to do a cross platform check to validate either/both thoughts.
Keep us updated
;-)
Rainer
-
To unsubscribe,
: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 12:28 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper hints needed.
You've horribly butchered bits vs bytes. Everything in the shaper
wizard is in bits. A 6Mb connection is 6Megabits, not 6MegaBytes,
hence the 600KByte download (notice
in the latest
snapshot?
Thanks
John
-Original Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 12:28 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper hints needed.
You've horribly butchered bits vs bytes
]
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 12:28 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper hints needed.
You've horribly butchered bits vs bytes. Everything in the shaper
wizard is in bits. A 6Mb connection is 6Megabits, not 6MegaBytes,
hence
John
-Original Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 12:28 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper hints needed.
You've horribly butchered bits vs bytes. Everything
snapshot?
Thanks
John
-Original Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 12:28 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper hints needed.
You've horribly butchered bits vs
I have reloaded the machine using the 02-19-06 iso and then upgraded it to 02-21-06. I restored my config file. I then ran the traffic shaper wizard. I changed the allocated bandwidth to 384 for VOIP to try to fix the previous error. It never finished loading the queues page. It basically sits
: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic shaper question
All traffic hits qWANdef and qLANdef by default unless overridden by
specific rules which place that traffic in a different queue. That's
why we don't need (or have) a fallthrough catch all rule.
--Bill
On 12/14/05, RoboK [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
: support@pfsense.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic shaper question
All traffic hits qWANdef and qLANdef by default unless overridden by
specific rules which place that traffic in a different queue. That's
why we don't need (or have
PROTECTED]
To: RoboK [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: support@pfsense.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic shaper question
All traffic hits qWANdef and qLANdef by default unless overridden by
specific rules which place that traffic in a different queue
5:24 PM
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic shaper question
On 12/13/05, RoboK [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bill, please, i don`t see any rule in traffic shaper, that handle
users.
There are only rules that handles particular ports or services or
protocols.
I didn`t see any general
in pfSense in spite of this.
I don` know how explain detailed this yet :-}
Thank you very much
- Original Message -
From: Bill Marquette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: support@pfsense.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 7:59 PM
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic shaper question
I'm
-
From: Scott Ullrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: support@pfsense.com
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 5:24 PM
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic shaper question
On 12/13/05, RoboK [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bill, please, i don`t see any rule in traffic shaper, that handle
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic shaper question
On 12/13/05, RoboK [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bill, please, i don`t see any rule in traffic shaper, that handle
users.
There are only rules that handles particular ports or services or
protocols.
I didn`t see any general rule
PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: [pfSense Support] Traffic
Shaper / IPSec
If you build the traffic shaping rules for lan-wan will
it treat traffic destined to an IPsec tunnel as a part of that? Essentially
Im just looking to give priority to VoIP traffic anything else would be
below
If you build the traffic shaping rules for lan-wan will
it treat traffic destined to an IPsec tunnel as a part of that? Essentially Im
just looking to give priority to VoIP traffic anything else would be below
that. Even if it could be done on the LAN interface regardless of
destination.
IPSEC cannot be shaped (yet).
Scott
On 12/7/05, John Cianfarani [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you build the traffic shaping rules for lan-wan will it treat traffic
destined to an IPsec tunnel as a part of that? Essentially I'm just looking
to give priority to VoIP traffic anything else would
At 11:29 PM 12/7/2005, you wrote:
IPSEC cannot be shaped (yet).
yes and no. ESP/AH, no, but if you're doing nat-traversal, that's
encapsulated in UDP packets, so that would work, no?
Scott
On 12/7/05, John Cianfarani [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you build the traffic shaping rules for
:27 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper / IPSec
At 11:29 PM 12/7/2005, you wrote:
IPSEC cannot be shaped (yet).
yes and no. ESP/AH, no, but if you're doing nat-traversal, that's
encapsulated in UDP packets, so that would work, no?
Scott
On 12/7/05, John
not running low on bandwidth use 128 kbit/s for the queue.
Holger
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Kevin Wolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Freitag, 25. November 2005 08:47
An: support@pfsense.com
Betreff: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper Presets
Cool, sounds good, and thanks
: Kevin Wolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Freitag, 25. November 2005 08:47
An: support@pfsense.com
Betreff: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper Presets
Cool, sounds good, and thanks!
Quick question while on the topic of traffic shaping, anyone
know if the
Generic VOIP preset works
Cool, sounds good, and thanks!
Quick question while on the topic of traffic shaping, anyone know if the
Generic VOIP preset works with SunRocket? I just ordered their
service, haven't received anything in the mail to test it with yet, so
just curious if anyone's had any experience with the
save, so if you're
not running low on bandwidth use 128 kbit/s for the queue.
Holger
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Kevin Wolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Freitag, 25. November 2005 08:47
An: support@pfsense.com
Betreff: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper Presets
Cool
Just a few comments... first off, the rules for Shareaza and Gnutella
seem to be identical, so you might choose to either remove Shareaza, or
rename it to Gnutella 2- and have it shape TCP as well as UDP packets on
6346 since G2 uses both protocols, instead of only TCP (which would be
As a note/addition, does WinMX even exist anymore? That preset could be
removed.
Nelson Papel
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Wolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 14:22
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper Presets
Just a few
This would be your lucky day ;)
On 11/23/05, Kevin Wolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just a few comments... first off, the rules for Shareaza and Gnutella
seem to be identical, so you might choose to either remove Shareaza, or
rename it to Gnutella 2- and have it shape TCP as well as UDP packets
Okay :)
I still haven't had time to look through the generator code, but I
will, I am just too busy with the university now.
The MAN is actually over the internet (scattered public ip addresses
80.*.*.*, 194.*.*.*, etc)
http://www.pfsense.com/pastebin/245
Also right now what cannot be done is to
Thanks Bill!
It seems that if i get some free time I'll attempt to fix that
function to be recursive, and I'll let you know.
Meanwhile the config the wizard generates is a pretty good start for everything.
On 10/9/05, Bill Marquette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/9/05, Szasz Revai Endre [EMAIL
On 10/8/05, Szasz Revai Endre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) Is it possible, in the traffic shaper - to create another parent queue (parent to HFSC) - and to add some rules to this queue, so that traffic coming andgoing from specific ip adresses would go through this queue (which
wouldhave separate
On 10/10/05, Bill Marquette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been thinking a little more about this. Is the MAN part of
your local subnet? IE, if the pfSense WAN interface was on
24.0.0.0/8 is the MAN the same subnet, or is it just something you have
to go through? I think I can make an easy change
On 10/9/05, Scott Ullrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Take a look at how the EZ Shaper wizard creates parent queues.
Either way I have to edit the created configuration manually, or there
is a possibilty to create parent queues with the webconfigurator ?
Yes, via the webConfigurator.
Ah,
That's because you added them wrong and I'm not 100% positive the
existing shaper will work in that configuration. Bottom line is
that only the EZ-Shaper output is supported at this time. I'm
working on more shaper changes (stuff that will likely break whatever
custom stuff you do anyway), but I
PS. I'd be willing to answer any intelligent questions on the
code in the meantime from anyone willing to work on making setups like
this work. Hint, most of this will be XML setup in the wizard and
making sure the code in /etc/inc/shaper.inc actually parses a queue
tree with more than 2 levels
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
