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

    Traffic Shaper Stuff

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved 2.3-RC Snapshot Feedback and Issues - ARCHIVED
    10 Posts 3 Posters 2.4k 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.
    • KOMK
      KOM
      last edited by

      Not exactly top priority, but I thought I would mention a couple of things about the traffic shaper.  The old folder, page & node icons used by the traffic shaper hierarchy view are ugly, unaliased yuck that make me think of Windows 3.1.  I've always hated that folders/pages visual representation and wish it would change, but if it must be folders/pages then perhaps nicer-looking icons would make it look less primitive.  The nesting is fine but the folders/pages analogy always felt awkward to me.

      Also, the Status page is about as basic as can be.  User jvorhees came up with a nice-looking status page for 2.0.x that shows you literally everything in a single view.  I really wish some of this would have been incorporated into 2.3:

      https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=58245.0

      shaper.png
      shaper.png_thumb

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • jdillardJ
        jdillard
        last edited by

        @KOM:

        Not exactly top priority, but I thought I would mention a couple of things about the traffic shaper.  The old folder, page & node icons used by the traffic shaper hierarchy view are ugly, unaliased yuck that make me think of Windows 3.1.  I've always hated that folders/pages visual representation and wish it would change, but if it must be folders/pages then perhaps nicer-looking icons would make it look less primitive.  The nesting is fine but the folders/pages analogy always felt awkward to me.

        Yea that could use some work. I'm not familiar with the traffic shaper enough to know what that tree visually represents and how best to represent it. Are icons even necessary? Maybe just bold the "folders" instead?

        I also broke the coloring in the light theme…working on fixing that.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • jimpJ
          jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
          last edited by

          It's mostly there to show the parent/child relationship and hierarchy of the queues.  I suspect the folder display was chosen because at the time it was a common visualization in things like Windows explorer for such relationships.

          As long as each level is visually nested under its parent level, the icons and layout are all debatable

          Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

          Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

          Do not Chat/PM for help!

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • KOMK
            KOM
            last edited by

            It's literally just two parent queues and child queues underneath.  The queues hold network packets so it can prioritize them.  Perhaps a down arrow for WAN, an up arrow for LAN and side arrows for the children?  Perhaps no icon required at all, as you said?

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • jimpJ
              jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
              last edited by

              That may be what you get with the wizard but you can have much more complicated relationships with HFSC and CBQ, with multiple levels of nested queues. It really is more of a tree type hierarchy that can go much deeper.

              Plus there are numerous different interface names possible, coding in special handling for WAN and LAN is a bad idea.

              Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

              Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

              Do not Chat/PM for help!

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • KOMK
                KOM
                last edited by

                Plus there are numerous different interface names possible, coding in special handling for WAN and LAN is a bad idea.

                I don't know what you mean here.  I don't see anything about special handling of anything based on NIC name.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • jimpJ
                  jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                  last edited by

                  @KOM:

                  I don't know what you mean here.  I don't see anything about special handling of anything based on NIC name.

                  This:
                  @KOM:

                  Perhaps a down arrow for WAN, an up arrow for LAN and side arrows for the children?

                  Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

                  Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

                  Do not Chat/PM for help!

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • KOMK
                    KOM
                    last edited by

                    I'm still not getting it.  You're saying it's too hard to determine which is WAN and LAN, and put the appropriate arrow icon beside it?

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • jdillardJ
                      jdillard
                      last edited by

                      Yea. That tree script is probably best left being agnostic considering the way it is currently being used. It would be too much work for what I feel would be little return in this case.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • KOMK
                        KOM
                        last edited by

                        Ok, got it.  Thanks for the input.

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