• Limit traffic out with limiter (2.0)

    Locked
    8
    0 Votes
    8 Posts
    4k Views
    jimpJ
    ermal, When we discussed this the other day, you said with multi-wan it was better to put the limiters on floating rules (unless I misunderstood something, which when it comes to shaping is quite possible). Or perhaps that was specific to what the other person was trying to do.
  • Traffic Shaping 155 Mbps

    Locked
    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    2k Views
    No one has replied
  • PF 2.0 traffic shaper

    Locked
    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    2k Views
    T
    P2P trafic can't  detect any rules  :-[
  • Traffic Shaping for YouTube

    Locked
    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    4k Views
    D
    Oh yeah, good point.
  • Newsgroup traffic

    Locked
    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    1k Views
    D
    I assume you mean NNTP?  If so, that is port 119, if memory serves.  Can't you just penalize that?
  • APPLICATION AWARE TRIGGERED QUALITY OF SERVICE (AATQoS)

    Locked
    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    2k Views
    No one has replied
  • 0 Votes
    1 Posts
    2k Views
    No one has replied
  • Per MAC Address limits?

    Locked
    6
    0 Votes
    6 Posts
    8k Views
    M
    @jimp: You probably want the Limiters feature, but that is only available in pfSense 2.0. if it can give a global limit and a exception on certain ip/macs than i have to wait till 2.0
  • TCP Port based QoS - pfsense2.0

    Locked
    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    3k Views
    R
    and going through the wizard for a third time is resulting in ~80ms while downloading. i think i'll just monitor it for a bit, seems to be ok.
  • Rule loading error after shaper wizard with 1.2.3

    Locked
    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    2k Views
    No one has replied
  • MOVED: pfSense - 2.0 – traffic shapping

    Locked
    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    2k Views
    No one has replied
  • FTP traffic and traffic shaping

    Locked
    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    3k Views
    P
    I was able to solve this problem by turning off the FTP userland helper on the LAN interface.
  • Is Traffic Shaper the best solution to block Torrents?

    Locked
    10
    0 Votes
    10 Posts
    12k Views
    P
    For 99% of the users on the network, blocking/shaping bittorrent traffic using commonly-used ports seems to be effective. For the 1% who got through, you can use other means of tracking them down.
  • Traffic Shaping on demand

    Locked
    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    2k Views
    No one has replied
  • Bandwidth limit to AP clients on a subnet

    Locked
    7
    0 Votes
    7 Posts
    5k Views
    R
    I pluged it in and it worked in a second.  :) Aug 27 09:18:25 kernel: ugen0.2: <vendor 0x0fe6=""> at usbus0 Aug 27 09:18:25 kernel: udav0: <vendor 0="" 2="" 0x0fe6="" usb="" network="" controller,="" class="" 0,="" rev="" 1.10="" 1.01,="" addr=""> on usbus0 Aug 27 09:18:25 kernel: miibus5: <mii bus=""> on udav0 Aug 27 09:18:25 kernel: ukphy0: <generic ieee="" 802.3u="" media="" interface=""> PHY 0 on miibus5 Aug 27 09:18:25 kernel: ukphy0: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto Aug 27 09:18:25 kernel: ue0: <usb ethernet=""> on udav0</usb></generic></mii></vendor></vendor> Now I need to learn how to set up traffic shaping…
  • Traffic Shaping; need help setting it up

    Locked
    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    2k Views
    No one has replied
  • traffic shaping on 2.0 blocking traffic

    Locked
    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    2k Views
    No one has replied
  • Matching QOS Rule using Number of transferred Bytes

    Locked
    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    2k Views
    M
    I'd really like to know that too … A friend was challenging me on pfSense on a forum and asked my exactly that and pointing this same Tomato firmware. Imagine you download some files from MegaUpload, a Linux distrib. for example... This download would get high priority slowing down your normal browsing... But HFSC would cut the bandwidth in two, that's not a big deal, but I'd rather have a full speed while browsing and see this MegaUpload download in the P2P queue.
  • Rules are not applying without restart

    Locked
    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    3k Views
    D
    @stramato: does this apply to BETA4 2.0 also? Yes and no.  Yes, if you've just reconfigured the traffic shaper/ rules.  No, if it is with regards to WAN side load balancing/ failover.  The latter has an option to cover it so that states are reset automatically when the outgoing interface is switched.
  • Outgoing VoIP traffic ends up in wrong queue …

    Locked
    7
    0 Votes
    7 Posts
    4k Views
    E
    I'd "solved" it with a workaround. I configured a IP alias which contains all clients. Then i had set up the shaper only with the penalize box pointing to the alias. The allowed bandwith was [MeasuredBandwith] - [150 Kbit per Phone]. The remaining bandwith is for the phones … ... not a really charming solution, and it's working only with my very easy setup!
Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.