Traffic Shaper not working (HFSC). P2P keeps taking almost all.



  • I have 2 test queues.

    1. Default Priority 3
    Bandwidth 60%

    2. P2P priority 1
    Bandwidth 5%

    P2P takes always 90-95% of whole bandwidth, no matter what priorities.

    I even created extra rule for default traffic above of P2P (but I shouldn't as this should apply for any non assigned traffic and should get 60% of bandwidth and most of free bandwidth from 35% as priority is 3).

    What to do ???  I already lost huge amount of time (and money as I'm playing with it instead of working) for pfSense and I can't find solution (before I had problem with rules which weren't working, I've changed pfsense from 64 to 32 and it worked).



  • Perhaps if you post screenies of your setup so we can see how you have it , that would help.  According to your other post, PFSense is crap and it doesn't work so are you legitimately asking for help or ??

    Is HFSC difficult to configure?  yes it is.  You have to be willing to play with it and test it out and try different things to get it to do what you want.  Can you make it work for your environment?  Yes I think you can.  I am not an expert by any means but I do run network / servers for 2 LAN parties of 125 / 135 people  multiple times a year and I use PFSense with multiple WAN's  (DOCSIS 3.0 modems) to provide the bandwidth / internet.

    I have posts in this forums of my setups that I use that work for me.

    Others in this forum use PRIQ which DOES use priority while HFSC DOES NOT use the priority tag.  (A little reading of the forum would glean that information)

    It is really depressing that new people just come in here and post up the same questions without taking the time to read the 1st page or two of post and see if some of that applies to them.



  • @sideout:

    Perhaps if you post screenies of your setup so we can see how you have it , that would help.  According to your other post, PFSense is crap and it doesn't work so are you legitimately asking for help or ??

    Is HFSC difficult to configure?  yes it is.  You have to be willing to play with it and test it out and try different things to get it to do what you want.  Can you make it work for your environment?  Yes I think you can.  I am not an expert by any means but I do run network / servers for 2 LAN parties of 125 / 135 people  multiple times a year and I use PFSense with multiple WAN's  (DOCSIS 3.0 modems) to provide the bandwidth / internet.

    I have posts in this forums of my setups that I use that work for me.

    Others in this forum use PRIQ which DOES use priority while HFSC DOES NOT use the priority tag.  (A little reading of the forum would glean that information)

    It is really depressing that new people just come in here and post up the same questions without taking the time to read the 1st page or two of post and see if some of that applies to them.

    I will post images but it is basically copy of what NAT created, I've changed IP and quote.

    I were looking for solution. I found only posts saying that you can't do it, it's not working or traffic shaping isn't working, use PRIQ etc.

    I'm working as software developer and I can't believe that any one (even for free) can release such a software and provide no proper guidelines or help.

    I'm comparing it to what I know, Packeteer (I know that it costs more than a good car but still to create nice and working GUI your clients doesn't needs to spend xx,xxx per machine and X-XX k of $ yearly).

    I've spent few days in total to find answers but 99% of videos is just a wizard, most of topics has no explanation what so ever (most of people were making some stupid errors because of GUI ).



  • 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.


Log in to reply