Per IP traffic shaping–share bandwith evenly between IP addresses??
-
Like I stated earlier , it could be the way the torrent software is downloading it. You might have to look at a layer7 or some other way to restrict it. You can check the forums here and see that people have posts inregards to restricting torrents.
All I can tell you is that fox' setup worked for me in my application of strictly TCP stream downloads and with my other traffic shaping that I had setup. YMMV.
-
Thanks sideout for all the help,
its working now, i upgraded to the latest pfsense version and exactly the same limiters and rules are working as expected with the 2.1.3 version. previously i had 2.0.2 version.Thanks again
Regards
Ashfaq -
Awesome!!
-
This is just to update on my last message:
After another try with a clean 2.0.2 install the same rules & limits started working.
i even tried limiters with captive portal (which creates its own limiter per IP) and it works properly as expected, i.e. it applies both limiters at the same time and user is capped with the least one. -
Hi! I try this share bandwith, But I have a Problem, when I start to download on pc1 and during download, I try to browse the web on pc2 but the pc2 was very slow to load the page, I think it is effective only on the client were they download at the same time,. how to setup a share bandwith even if browsing and downloading at the same time but they are equal bandwidth?
or anyone have an idea how to setup a total bandwidth limit @ port 80 and limit bandwidth per ip? example i have 5 PCs the bandwidth per pc is 256kbps each and the total bandwidth is 1024kbps, and when the 5 PCs browse the web or download, the 5 PCs are not exceed the total bandwidth I assign?
total bandwidth: 1024kbps @ port 80 –----> 256kbps per PCs @ port 80.
thanks in advance!!
-
Hi,
This will work for LAN-side rules where there's a single gateway being specified (or default gateway). But how to apply this technique for multi-WAN setup where the bandwidths of each of the WANs are not necessarily same?
There are two cases: a. when gateways are in load-balanced group, b. when gateways are in failover group
Case A: Load-balanced Gateways:
What should be the value of the limiter bandwidths? The total bandwidth of all of the WANs in the load-balanced group?Case B: Failover Gateways:
In this case, depending on which gateway is up/down, any of the gateways could be sending the traffic. So, which gateway's bandwidth should be set in the limiter?The main issue is that the limiters are specific to each WAN bandwidth but in loadbalanced or failover groups, no specific gateway is set in the rule - so which limiter to set?
-
So, between the walk-thru from foxale08 and some of the other tips listed by sideout I've managed to get my limiters set up in a way that shares bandwidth evenly amongst clients in my different groups (Thank you guys, BTW!)… but I'm having a little trouble with what I would like to do next.
Background:
-We have our main location and two satellite locations.
-We have site2site OpenVPN connections to each satellite. (Site A is VPN Server, sites B & C are clients)
-We have a phone system that uses the vpn connection for VOIP communications between locations.
-Sites A & B have decent connections to the internet (both are about 50Mb down / 15Mb up)
-Site C has a craptasticly old T1 that does 1 down / 1 up on a good dayWhat I'd like to do is use limiters within this current set of limiter groups to now allocate a guaranteed portion of the bandwidth to the phone system that the other limiters never get to touch. But I don't seem to be able to pull this off correctly. Would they even be within these groups or new groups themselves… I'm kinda dumb and lost.
Couple of questions would be:
1- With the current setup, is this even necessary?
1a- if so, how?
2- Would this be more a job for queues?
2a- if so, what's the best way to go about that... I have yet to have much luck with VOIP queues because of the VPN.Any help, pointers, or insight is greatly appreciated!
-
To use WAN-specific limiters (limiters that have bandwidths set as per the available bandwidth of the specific WAN) on WAN interface rules, the following questions arise:
1. What should be the mask for the upload limiter? Source address or destination address?
2. What should be the mask for the download limiter? Source address or destination address?
3. Should the upload limiter be placed as In or Out? Likewise, will the download limiter be placed as In or Out?Thanks!
Msu -
I'm not sure what I'm missing, but foxale08's suggestions seem to only restrict total available bandwidth. We have 100mbps up and down. If I run two speed tests side by side on separate machines, one gets around 85/85 while the other gets the rest.
If I set the limiters to 50mbps then total available bandwidth does go down to 50, but it is still not shared evenly so limiters appear to work, just not the way I expect them to.
-
Start two long downloads and see what happens.
-
Start two long downloads and see what happens.
Downloads may not use the entire bandwidth. Few servers have the capacity to provide 100mbps speed for every client. Plus, speed test does the same thing.
-
And the speedtest sites do a lot of weird buffering to set things up and it's really hard to get two or more going at the same time.
To see it work on a 100Mbit set the parent limiter to a lower value (Say 2Mbits) and start two or more downloads.
-
Has anybody been successful in equally dividing the bandwidth b/w a pc with torrent download and one with simple browsing?
or a mobile device against with simple data usage and a torrent downloading pc ?with me the torrent download PC always gets almost all of the bandwidth all the time !
Ashfaq
-
Limits apply correctly when test with speedtest.com, but when torrent download starts on the same machine the limiters have no effect on it, the torrent downloads goes full throttle.
any suggestions ?
-
Configured properly they will go full throttle until there's congestion. That's the point. If you want to limit that specific IP to a hard-set top-end, set up your limiter that way.
-
Thanks for the reply Derelict,
hard-set-top-end is what i did to test if limiters are even working ! , since my other configuration (discussed in this thread) to share bandwidth equally was not working at all for torrents.
i made two limiters download and upload, limit them with 512Kbps and 128Kbps, applied destination and source masking. and then applied in the firewall rule.
the PC is now limited to 512Kbps on speed-test but the same PC when running torrent get the entire 2Mbps data.
-
Is this a long-running torrent connection? Did you clear states after making changes to the limiter?
-
Oh yes I do reset the states after every change and also sometimes do a restart of PfSense to make sure of it.
its the same case for both long-running and recently-started torrent sessions.i also noticed something unusual yesterday when for some reason my limiters just stopped working after a simple reboot, had to recreate them to start working properly again and they did, problem resolved. but the strange thing i noticed in the exercise is that during this problem if a limiter is attached in the firewall rule i could not browse, ping www.google.com site or do any other network stuff like email etc, if i remove the limiter from the rule everything was okay. but the torrents were working full speed all that time without any break, with or without the limiter.
the recreation of limiters (like they were before) resolved the issue, but thats not the point to discuss, the torrents were like they never belonged to the rule or limiter (from the same machine), everything else seems to be effected though. i looked closely to the diagnostics->limiter-info and i could see the no of packets/bytes from PC that clearly belonged to torrent, which means it was infect passing the queues.
i tried different things with rules and disable, enable, block, pass all the LAN rules but nothing effected the torrent streams(made sure to reset the states after each change). the firewall logs was also showing the traffic on port torrent was using.
all in all I was clueless as to how to debug this trend.
Thanks for all the help
Regards -
Are you sure you have all your in/out source/dest mask rules right? You should probably post screenshots of your limiters and the associated firewall rules.
The limiters are application agnostic. They operate on IP addresses and interfaces. Given the correct application in rules, they just work.
-
Screen shots are attached.
its important to mention that i initially tried to use the queue based setup discussed earlier in this thread and u can see my earlier posts with screen-shots for that setup as well. but since i failed to achieve the desired outcome i am now trying to apply a simple limiter to get this torrent thing resolved first. and the screen-shots with this message are for this simple setup.
if u like i can post the speed-test and torrent screenshots separately as well with traffic graph n all.
