Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    Traffic shaper changes

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Expired/Withdrawn Bounties
    34 Posts 7 Posters 31.1k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • M
      mrt_ok
      last edited by

      hi guys,

      I would donate $1000 after my first successful deal with the transparent shaper box.

      my requirements are low:
      just shaping in bridged mode (two interfaces) to give certain services the QoS they need (e.g. web / citrix / shh etc…)

      kind regards,
      mrt_ok

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • W
        wcoolnet
        last edited by

        Would it be possible to make this work on a larger scale?
        For example: OC12 connected to a few hundred servers in a datacenter. PfSense would limit the maximum amount of bandwidth each ip could use…

        If this can realistically be done, then the funding options for pfsense would dramatically increase.
        This could open the door to companies with lots of money, as they could use pfsense on their own infrastructure.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • S
          sullrich
          last edited by

          @mrt_ok:

          hi guys,

          I would donate $1000 after my first successful deal with the transparent shaper box.

          my requirements are low:
          just shaping in bridged mode (two interfaces) to give certain services the QoS they need (e.g. web / citrix / shh etc…)

          kind regards,
          mrt_ok

          Sorry but we need the cash up front.  We have already been fooled into believing this from others and the policy now is half is due up front and half on completion.  With this many people pooling their funds together we will need to gather the money up before starting the project.  Sorry!

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • S
            sullrich
            last edited by

            @wcoolnet:

            Would it be possible to make this work on a larger scale?
            For example: OC12 connected to a few hundred servers in a datacenter. PfSense would limit the maximum amount of bandwidth each ip could use…

            If this can realistically be done, then the funding options for pfsense would dramatically increase.
            This could open the door to companies with lots of money, as they could use pfsense on their own infrastructure.

            Per user bandwidth is a little more difficult.  ALTQ does not have a per user distribution classifier so it would require a rule and queue for every user which is not doable in your case (it sounds like).

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • W
              wcoolnet
              last edited by

              Would it be possible to limit any connection to any server to something like 10Mbps?

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • S
                sullrich
                last edited by

                @wcoolnet:

                Would it be possible to limit any connection to any server to something like 10Mbps?

                Yes.  1 rule + queue.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • W
                  wcoolnet
                  last edited by

                  Question:
                  100 servers connected to oc12. all are web servers. 1 server is experiencing a traffic spike and receiving thousands of connections.

                  Is there no way to prevent a single server from hogging the entire oc12, using altq?

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • S
                    sullrich
                    last edited by

                    Again, 1 queue and 1 rule per server or ip.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • B
                      billm
                      last edited by

                      @wcoolnet:

                      Question:
                      100 servers connected to oc12. all are web servers. 1 server is experiencing a traffic spike and receiving thousands of connections.

                      Is there no way to prevent a single server from hogging the entire oc12, using altq?

                      You'll need a queue per server (I expect that we'll need a wizard for that…or a way to branch the existing wizard code...not terribly difficult) to make this work.  Then all you do is specify realtime guarantee's on each queue such that each web server is guarantee'd a certain amount of bandwidth, but could burst to whatever limit you set (or don't set).

                      --Bill

                      pfSense core developer
                      blog - http://www.ucsecurity.com/
                      twitter - billmarquette

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • B
                        billm
                        last edited by

                        @sullrich:

                        @mrt_ok:

                        hi guys,

                        I would donate $1000 after my first successful deal with the transparent shaper box.

                        my requirements are low:
                        just shaping in bridged mode (two interfaces) to give certain services the QoS they need (e.g. web / citrix / shh etc…)

                        kind regards,
                        mrt_ok

                        Sorry but we need the cash up front.  We have already been fooled into believing this from others and the policy now is half is due up front and half on completion.  With this many people pooling their funds together we will need to gather the money up before starting the project.  Sorry!

                        Just to touch on this…I'm somewhat expecting that I'll be the one working on and claiming this bounty.  As Scott mentioned, we've (myself included) had people offer up bounties and then not pay once the work has been completed.  If it makes people feel better about fronting some of the bounty, I suspect (I haven't confirmed this with Scott and/or Chris yet) the primary pfSense donations account could be used to escrow the funds which could be returned minus whatever Paypal charges (not sure what type of account Chris has) if the bounty isn't fullfilled.  Unless someone knows of a better way to escrow funds of course :)

                        --Bill

                        pfSense core developer
                        blog - http://www.ucsecurity.com/
                        twitter - billmarquette

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • W
                          wcoolnet
                          last edited by

                          I think that would work well

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • W
                            wcoolnet
                            last edited by

                            For the purpose of getting more people interested in donating to this feature, I think it would be good to get some pricing information for commercial traffic shaping bridges from companys like Cisco or APconnections.
                            Then we can brag about how much money someone could save.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • S
                              sullrich
                              last edited by

                              Yes, we can use the pfSense account to escrow the money.  That would work out well for everyone I would suspect.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • S
                                sai
                                last edited by

                                With several people pooling it would be a good idea for Bill to let us know what he aims to do. Some of the requests may be non-feasible, some may even be  in conflict.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • M
                                  mrt_ok
                                  last edited by

                                  Hi,

                                  btw I would spent time and efforts to implement this in front.

                                  Have to check if I can get some money for this at front…

                                  with my customer

                                  mrt_ok

                                  Update: I guess I can gather that money (50%) in front. Bill, do you have an idea how long it takes to do this? I mean I cannot spend money in front without a schedule.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • S
                                    sullrich
                                    last edited by

                                    @mrt_ok:

                                    Hi,

                                    btw I would spent time and efforts to implement this in front.

                                    Have to check if I can get some money for this at front…

                                    with my customer

                                    mrt_ok

                                    Update: I guess I can gather that money (50%) in front. Bill, do you have an idea how long it takes to do this? I mean I cannot spend money in front without a schedule.

                                    I am sorry but I guess that you didn't read my entire sentence.  With this many people contributing to one bounty, we need 100% of the funds up front.  The last thing we need is to gather 50% from everyone and then two people disappear at the right time.  It has happened before and we are tired of being burned by good faith agreements.  Sorry!

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • B
                                      billm
                                      last edited by

                                      @sai:

                                      With several people pooling it would be a good idea for Bill to let us know what he aims to do. Some of the requests may be non-feasible, some may even be  in conflict.

                                      I'll start a new thread so I can have an updateable first post and merge this thread into it later today.

                                      –Bill

                                      pfSense core developer
                                      blog - http://www.ucsecurity.com/
                                      twitter - billmarquette

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • M
                                        mrt_ok
                                        last edited by

                                        okay fine.

                                        the goal is $10000 ?

                                        then I guess we need a BIG contributer …

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • S
                                          sullrich
                                          last edited by

                                          10,000 was suggested by one person.  Nobody from coreteam@ has set a price.  I am sure the more people that drive the bounty up slowly the more interested Bill is becoming :)

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • M
                                            mrt_ok
                                            last edited by

                                            bill, could you please give us a hint how much you need, cause that indirectly helps the time-schedule.

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.