"Hard" limit for the queue
-
There are still uses for hard limits on P2P speeds. For instance if I let DC++ download at my max speed ( 100Mbit ) then everything else just bogs down to a slow crawl. Not due to no available bandwidth but cuz the comp is stressed to hanlde so high multiple downloads.
But i suppose its not really a firewall issue – i use netlimiter for that now and it works... Now what I would like is if Netlimiter could max out the speeds when the screensaver kicks in - but otherwise limit P2P progs. That would be a nice feature.
/DaK/
-
Firewall>Traffic Shaper>Queues. To put a 500 Kb limit on the bandwidth, you need to put "500Kb" into the Service Curve Section in the m2 column box next to "The maximum allowed bandwidth for the queue." Make sure your in the correct queue for P2P. It takes a few moments to kick in after "Applying" the changes.
How about "hard limit" for total upload?
Solution described abowe doesn't work for qWANRoot.
I also find out that real upload is higher then value defined in Bandwidth field for qWANRoot queue.
-
Are you running the latest image? http://www.pfsense.com/~sullrich/1.0-BETA1-TESTING-SNAPSHOT-1-24-06/
If not then upgrade and rerun the traffic shaper wizard.
-
Are you running the latest image? http://www.pfsense.com/~sullrich/1.0-BETA1-TESTING-SNAPSHOT-1-24-06/
If not then upgrade and rerun the traffic shaper wizard.
Right now I have Beta 1 first release.
I'll try to upgrade soon -
Just for clarity here, I'm going to have a very complicated installation coming up soon, and I want to make sure this is going to work.
I need to be able to shape/limit throughput on several levels. One would be based on either the source IP or mac address (I'm presuming it would have to be by IP), so that if someone is paying for 1Mbit of throughput, they only get 1Mbit total, and the other based on protocol, ie, SIP, IAX2, and SSH get high priorities, web, ftp, get regular, and p2p gets low priority.
If I'm reading correctly, pfSense can do all of the above, right? I need to hard limit total throughput available to individual peers connected on an interface as well as shape the overall traffic. If it's 2am they're welcome to p2p all they want, but I can't have p2p futzing up voice calls, nor can I have a single user dominating the overall available bandwidth.
-
Shaper is being worked on still. I would not deploy it yet.
-
This wouldn't be a production environment for a couple more months. Right now I'm just trying to get my technology lined up. Presuming it were working as expected, is what I said correct?
-
I would wait for beta2 atleast.
-
I would wait for beta2 atleast.
And if you have sis cards I would forget about using the shaper. We've found an OS level bug that affects those cards (at a minimum). Intel FXP cards at this time are the only known good cards (I'll be posting a survey to get more info later).
–Bill
-
Not really trying to be a pest (honest!) but you didn't answer the question. :(
I know the code is in beta. I'm not looking for production deployment just yet. What I'm asking is that bugs aside, is what I'm talking about feasible? Would traffic shaper, when behaving as expect, deliver what I was referring to? Could I arbitrarily say, "traffic to and from ip x.x.x.x(.x.x) is not to exceed, 2mbit/sec at any given time" and also be able to prioritize traffic and still say, IAX2 and SIP get high priority, then ssh, vnc, x11, or rdp, then web traffic, etc? I've gotten the feeling the answer is yes, but I wasn't sure. I really haven't had the opportunity to dig into pipes and queues, and I wan to be able to contribute more to this project, but got severely sidetracked by a business emergency of sorts that is going to keep me tied up for probably 3 more weeks. :( OpenVPN has had to take a back seat because of this too, but the feature is so important to my business that I simply MUST find time to get back to it.
Sorry, wasn't trying to wail in your thread guys….
Anyhoo, am I on the right track?
-
Possibly. Try it in beta2
–Bill