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

    Traffic Shaping Wizards Alerts/notifications

    Traffic Shaping
    3
    13
    2.4k
    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.
    • R
      roccor
      last edited by

      I've tried multiple times over the past few years to use Traffic Shaping and going through the wizards are dreadfully painful!  Tonight is no exception, I get all the way through with no issues and thought I was golden but then Im redirected back to like page 4 I think: Custom Bandwidths are greater than 40%. Please lower them for the wizard to continue.

      Ok so I had started out with 3 x WAN's set to 32kb/s and 1024 on teh lan.  I wound up going down to 1kb/s on each of the 4 interfaces and it STILL says this!!  WTH does this mean? How is 1kb greater than 40%?  And of course I don't even know what custom bandwidth it's referring to!!

      Whichever guy coded this page I really wish would revamp the text here…at least a tiny bit to help elude to what a person is exactly exceeding.
      Capture.PNG
      Capture.PNG_thumb
      Capture1.PNG
      Capture1.PNG_thumb

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • N
        Nullity
        last edited by

        I think the problem is on the Download, which is usually LAN queues. You set Download to 32Kb then set LAN to 1024Kb, those seem to conflict.

        Can you show a picture or write ouut exactly what the traffic-shaping queue configuration looks like?

        PS - Yeah, the wizard is confusing, but simplifying complex things into a easily understood wizard is near impossible.

        Please correct any obvious misinformation in my posts.
        -Not a professional; an arrogant ignoramous.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • R
          roccor
          last edited by

          First off Im not sure why this question was diverted back to the TS forums when I was clearly making a feedback related plea.  The wording on that error within the wizard is not helpful in any possible way.

          Null, No you misunderstand or I i did not state enough info.. the VOIP page is where I started out with 32kb/s up all three WAN uploads.  But put 1mb on the LAN download.

          If the error wording was a little more clear or easier to understand then I might not be having a problem with it.  I'm def not asking to put lipstick on the traffic shaping pig but I'm sure those more experienced in it's config could explain it or at least give some easier to understand text in the wizard itself.

          And seriously.. mods, why the move with no explanation?  I made this post without looking for help on the problem.  This was honestly a suggestion towards the cryptic error.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • N
            Nullity
            last edited by

            @roccor:

            First off Im not sure why this question was diverted back to the TS forums when I was clearly making a feedback related plea.  The wording on that error within the wizard is not helpful in any possible way.

            Null, No you misunderstand or I i did not state enough info.. the VOIP page is where I started out with 32kb/s up all three WAN uploads.  But put 1mb on the LAN download.

            If the error wording was a little more clear or easier to understand then I might not be having a problem with it.  I'm def not asking to put lipstick on the traffic shaping pig but I'm sure those more experienced in it's config could explain it or at least give some easier to understand text in the wizard itself.

            And seriously.. mods, why the move with no explanation?  I made this post without looking for help on the problem.  This was honestly a suggestion towards the cryptic error.

            I think that the error message is actually coming from pf itself. If my assumption is true, your complaints belong with FreeBSD/OpenBSD. Granted, the messages are confusing to a casual pf user, but that is the nature of these advanced features.

            Can you please post pictures or precise details about your queue configuration?

            (I accidently "thanked" your post.)

            Please correct any obvious misinformation in my posts.
            -Not a professional; an arrogant ignoramous.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • R
              roccor
              last edited by

              Thanks Null for your continued questions however I have no queue configuration, really I thought that was apparent.  I cannot get past this ridiculous error to complete the wizard and create queues.
              And if you are right, and the error text I am seeing is being passed from BSD to pf then that's fine.. although since it's just a guess at this point I'd love for a mod to confirm this.  that way while Im trying to google up this error I can ignore pfsense forums results and look straight to Free/OpenBRD forums or blogs.
              I have to state that while sometimes my text or formulation of sentences can come off brash or otherwise sharp tongued. It is in no way my intention to be snarky or smart-assed in my postings here. with my limited understanding of PF and the people behind it and it's relationship with BSD I merely assumed that since the PF http page was relaying the error that the choice of wording in said error was the result of PF staffers not BSD.
              If I am wrong in that then I'd yearn for confirmation.
              I went looking for sections mods in order to know the right person was for PM but did not find anything.

              Oh and Null.. why did you feel the need to say that you liked my post by accident?  I didnt even notice that I had karma.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • N
                Nullity
                last edited by

                @roccor:

                Thanks Null for your continued questions however I have no queue configuration, really I thought that was apparent.  I cannot get past this ridiculous error to complete the wizard and create queues.
                And if you are right, and the error text I am seeing is being passed from BSD to pf then that's fine.. although since it's just a guess at this point I'd love for a mod to confirm this.  that way while Im trying to google up this error I can ignore pfsense forums results and look straight to Free/OpenBRD forums or blogs.
                I have to state that while sometimes my text or formulation of sentences can come off brash or otherwise sharp tongued. It is in no way my intention to be snarky or smart-assed in my postings here. with my limited understanding of PF and the people behind it and it's relationship with BSD I merely assumed that since the PF http page was relaying the error that the choice of wording in said error was the result of PF staffers not BSD.
                If I am wrong in that then I'd yearn for confirmation.
                I went looking for sections mods in order to know the right person was for PM but did not find anything.

                Oh and Null.. why did you feel the need to say that you liked my post by accident?  I didnt even notice that I had karma.

                I figured I would note my accidental "thanks" simply for clarity. Not that I thought your post was bad, but I did not mean to give any accolades. No offense intended. I am here to help.

                Anyway, if you are using traffic-shaping, you must have a queue or limiters configuration. The cryptic error message is referring to your (HFSC?) queues having improper bandwidths in relation to the configured interface bandwidths. The wizard most likely created a few queues per interface based on your input in the wizard's configuration.

                We need to see the details of those queues to help you fix your problem.

                Please correct any obvious misinformation in my posts.
                -Not a professional; an arrogant ignoramous.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • R
                  roccor
                  last edited by

                  So each time you click Next during the wizard it's creating what you agreed to in that page? For this last attempt I chose PRIQ since everyone seems to think that's it's the easiest to edit after the wizard.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • N
                    Nullity
                    last edited by

                    @roccor:

                    So each time you click Next during the wizard it's creating what you agreed to in that page? For this last attempt I chose PRIQ since everyone seems to think that's it's the easiest to edit after the wizard.

                    I think the queues are created as the final step of the wizard.

                    Please correct any obvious misinformation in my posts.
                    -Not a professional; an arrogant ignoramous.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • R
                      roccor
                      last edited by

                      I'll recheck tonight but if that's the case then I'd have no queues since the wizard won't let me complete.

                      Any chance on getting a Mod/Admin to comment on whether or not the error text is pf or BSD generated?

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • N
                        Nullity
                        last edited by

                        @roccor:

                        I'll recheck tonight but if that's the case then I'd have no queues since the wizard won't let me complete.

                        Any chance on getting a Mod/Admin to comment on whether or not the error text is pf or BSD generated?

                        Ah, I see.
                        Can you post a screen-shot of the error page?

                        Could you try to set up each WAN individually rather than everything at once?

                        Edit: The error comes from the pfSense wizard itself. (Googled "Custom Bandwidths are greater".)

                        Please correct any obvious misinformation in my posts.
                        -Not a professional; an arrogant ignoramous.

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

                          And seriously.. mods, why the move with no explanation?

                          I'm not a mod, but the description for the Feedback forum seems clear enough:

                          Open board for feedback related to this forum

                          It's for feedback about the forum itself, not feedback for whatever problem you are having.  That's what the individual subforums are for, after all.  Your specific problem had to do with the traffic shaper, so your post was moved to the Traffic Shaping forum where it would get the most attention by those users who assist with traffic shaper issues.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • R
                            roccor
                            last edited by

                            Ah crap.. Thanks KOM.  I was waiting on someone who'd know to toss an answer in.  I overlooked that crucial bit of info.

                            @Null I can try single wans at a time.. I'm likely over-complicating it but I was/am unsure of what all I'd need to manually change by adding in two more WAN interfaces after the fact.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • N
                              Nullity
                              last edited by

                              @roccor:

                              Ah crap.. Thanks KOM.  I was waiting on someone who'd know to toss an answer in.  I overlooked that crucial bit of info.

                              @Null I can try single wans at a time.. I'm likely over-complicating it but I was/am unsure of what all I'd need to manually change by adding in two more WAN interfaces after the fact.

                              I used the wizard to give me an idea of how the rules & queues were setup, then I manually created my own rules & queues, which really helped demystify pfSense's traffic-shaping setup.

                              Please correct any obvious misinformation in my posts.
                              -Not a professional; an arrogant ignoramous.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • First post
                                Last post