Hi there, For your WAN to LAN floating rule, did you set WAN as the interface and direction as "in"? Thanks! msu

They work fine together. I have previously documented that the limiter and QoS work fine together. I have shown screenshots of an LoL game going while downloading from Steam. LoL uses UDP not TCP for the game client once the game is started.  It uses port 80 during the setup of the game. Again if you can post screenshots of your setup so we can see it instead of blindly posting that it is not working then maybe we can help. Otherwise it appears you just want to troll.

Either in this thread or a new one, would you mind sharing screenshots/details about your squid proxy setup i might, if i get a chance to. it did help when it was just me and facebook, but my dad started using a bunch of my internet and he started making us go over, so i came here to figure out how to limit bandwidth.  i currently am playing with the settings but i have it set to 150/50Kbps, at that speed the 144x170 videos can not stream from youtube.  also my email and facebook go really slow, but it is the price of having the internet i do. i would recommend going to youtube and looking it up.  i waited a month with this post here then i had a light bulb moment and looked on youtube.  make sure that you include 'PFsense [version of PFS]' in your search.  it is a lot faster then waiting for me to remember how i set it up in 6+ months ago. i took a minute and looked one up https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSVE_UetX4 as well for your satellite broadband? i have exede internet <http: www.exede.com="" internet-packages-pricing="" service-availability="">.  i haven't had any problems with them charging me more if i go over my 10GB limit (they just slow me down a lot), but i am doing this bandwidth limiter to make sure they do not charge me extra in the future.  i pay $50 a month with $10 for hardware rental (or $220 for 2 years up front) and i get a 12d/3u Mb/s and unmetered from midnight to 5am local time. the unmetered period is the only reason i bought this if it wasn't for that i would still be on dialup.  not that satellite internet is bad, but take my advice DO WHAT EVER YOU CAN TO GET LAND LINE DSL OR CABLE.  the 10GB limit is very low and 'standard' use of email and facebook will eat in no time.</http:>

Well I made HFSC work for me and didnt use PRIQ.  Packeteer does just one thing , packet shaping.  PFSense does way more than just packet shape. There are guidelines for help , they have paid support that you can get along with paying for being a gold member. I would remind you that the key word here is free. P2P traffic can be hard to shape due to the nature of how most of the P2P programs work. PFSense has Layer7 shaping as well as the limiters and you will probably have to put some effort into getting Layer 7 to work for you. I choose to take the brute force method and apply a static limiter to all unknown TCP connections rather than try and limit specifically P2P.  But then I am using PFSense at  LAN parties that only run for 2 or 3 days and not 24/7 at my place of work. For that , we pay the big dollars and use other products. Since you are a software developer then perhaps you would take the time to write a package for PFSense that will do the shaping you want and contribute to the greater good instead of complaining about the lack of support and enable the rest of us idiots to not make the same stupid errors.

i just figured this out last night.  go to my forum post below and it will have a picture of what i did.  also read the 1st comment (done by me) as it describes how to fix what was in my original post. https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=77134.0

@jimp: Bursting isn't set right in the rules on any release. Fixed by this: https://github.com/pfsense/pfsense/commit/d0f365c2774209a5ca32a5c0de09010ddd540acf Burst is always in Bytes, a fixed size, NOT a throughput. So it's not possible to set a burst of X Mbit/s, but you could set one for 5,000,000 (~5MBytes) Are you sure? Looking at the information presented by diagnostic status in 2.1.2, the figure entered for burst in the limiter dialog is interpreted as Mbytes. Steve

Thanks for the assist, but I just solved it. I created a new queue under LAN called qLink, same hierarchy as qInternet, assigned 1Gbit to LAN and 993MBit to qLink. Defaulted queue to qInternet, created SMB floating rule for all interfaces (top of the list) with qLink queue. Getting a whooping 80MBit transfer speed between PC's under same network compared to 8MBit. Also getting 10Mbit between interfaces (one client has 100M NIC). Next thing to work on: LanCache  ;D

Good questions. On the "By Queue" tab you'll see that each queue can be associated with multiple interfaces. Like you I'm unclear how available download bandwidth is shared between multiple LANs. Upload is simple as that's defined once, on the WAN interface. I'm not sure if the wizard is doing it incorrectly as it shows all LANs as peers at the top level with no common parent. I'd have expected a single download queue with the LANs as children, sharing that bandwidth (assuming that each LAN is faster than the WAN!). Steve

PRIQ doesn't rely on bandwidth specifications; all it cares about is higher priority packets go first.  The traffic shaper UI treis to accommodate everything at once, but not all elements apply to all shapers. Also, the traffic shaper isn't a limiter, so your queues will use up as much bandwidth as they can get while following the rules.  If you have no action in your high queues, your low queues will zip along.  When higher-class traffic appears, it gets priority, but the lower queues aren't throttled.  If your P2P queue is still getting 600K/s, then it means that your higher queues are being properly serviced without impacting the P2P queue too much.

The wan interface is your upload BW, so 1Mb And the lan/wifi is your download BW, so 3Mb

Thanks for the info, this makes it more clear! Unfortunately it seems like there is no easy solution, the version with stacked pfsenses is nice but little bit overkill for a roadwarrior szenario ;)

No? Happening on my media downloader too.  Set to 500k limit downstream, currently downloading at 30 megabits.

For the Priority field then, at least, there should be any other lable other than the following: "For hfsc, the range is 0 to 7. The default is 1. Hfsc queues with a higher priority are preferred in the case of overload." It could be just this label: "Priority does not apply for HFSC. Please keep it blank for HFSC"

@sideout: Yes you can delete them. thank you i will observe for while…

I just stumbled on this yesterday and it is the best writeup of HFSC that I have seen yet: http://ace-host.stuart.id.au/russell/files/tc/doc/sch_hfsc.txt