i am currently using CBQ but i wanted a feature like wanted to shif the que
from high priority to lower after a spec period of time, as i have some dirty
users which have nothing to do but download HTTP contents from internet.
*:$., 88,.$:*(((*$ Stingray *:$., 88,.$:*((*$
----- Original Message ----
From: Jon Simola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: S t i n g r a y <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Open BSD <misc@openbsd.org>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 12:17:12 AM
Subject: Re: problems using HFSC with pf
On 10/12/06, S t i n g r a y <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i am facing problems using hfsc with PF.
That would be the first problem. Mention of HFSC was scrubbed from the
PF FAQ at http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/queueing.html for good reason.
Everything I learned about HFSC was from other web sites and lots of
experimentation. I have working configs, but in the time I've spent
figuring them out I've also figured out that HFSC is not a better
method of queueing. It solves a couple of *very* specific problems
that the vast majority of people will never run across.
> pfctl -f /etc/pf.conf
> pfctl: the sum of the child bandwidth higher than parent "root_fxp0"
> pfctl: linkshare sc exceeds parent's sc
> /etc/pf.conf:21: errors in queue definition
> pfctl: Syntax error in config file: pf rules not loaded
>
> althoug my pf.conf looks like this ..
>
> altq on $extif hfsc bandwidth 512Kb queue { www, msn, https, smtp, def }
> queue www bandwidth 20%
> queue msn bandwidth 20%
> queue https bandwidth 20%
> queue smtp bandwidth 20%
> queue def hfsc(default)
I can see a couple potential problems, your queues have no hfsc
definitions. Be careful with %'s in any bandwidth, as it may not be
taken as a percent of what you wanted (interface, root queue, parent
queue). I'd suggest using CBQ for this as you are defining 4 classes
of traffic. HFSC, if you get it working, will be far more complex than
you need for something simple like this.
--
Jon
