On 07/17/2006 04:14:56 PM, Michal Soltys wrote:
Back to my point: with limited inbound traffic (by isp) to 1mbit, the
incoming traffic is just some traffic. If whatever comes in, assigned
to ext_bulk1 saturates a bit ext_bulk2 - total traffic will be still
1mbit, and there won't be any hmmm, strain to suddenly limit ext_bulk1
in favor of ext_bulk2 - as far as I understand, borrow options on both
subqueues will just make PF adapt to current shape of whatever in that
1 mbit comes back through fxp0 and fxp1 to internal hosts. If borrows
were not there, then it could work, assuming participating host(s)
would behave and slow down.
I can't say I know enough to fully answer your question, but, from
experience: 1) You are more likely to get what you want using
hfsc queues than cbqs -- they work with latency, not just bandwidth.
This makes a big difference in perceived response to new traffic.
2) You need to limit your altq bandwidth to less than your isp
bandwidth or new traffic that could alter traffic shaping might
not get a chance to make it through the ISP's pipe and thence
to your filter. Try, for example, limiting your total bandwidth
to 0.9Mbps for a 1Mbps pipe. This reserves 0.1Mbps for 'new'
traffic and gives altq a chance to try to throttle 'old'
traffic to make way for the new. More 'spare' bandwidth means
more rapid filter adaption to new traffic, but I can't say
what a good balance is.
Regards,
Karl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
-- Robert A. Heinlein
