On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 01:24:09PM +0200, Alter wrote:
> Hello Luigi,
>
> Seems, Alex answered most of you questions
>
> LR> On the negative side:
> LR> - documentation on new features is completely absent. Just a brief mention
> LR> in the manpage of ftag/funtag, a short comment in a C source
Hello Luigi,
Seems, Alex answered most of you questions
LR> On the negative side:
LR> - documentation on new features is completely absent. Just a brief mention
LR> in the manpage of ftag/funtag, a short comment in a C source code.
# Fast ipfw tagging (ftag) - you can assign up to 32 ftags on
On 01.07.2012 23:09, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 03:54:35PM +, melif...@freebsd.org wrote:
Synopsis: [ipfw] [dummynet] [patch]: performance improvement and several
extensions
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-ipfw->melifaro
Responsible-Changed-By: melifaro
Responsi
On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 03:54:35PM +, melif...@freebsd.org wrote:
> Synopsis: [ipfw] [dummynet] [patch]: performance improvement and several
> extensions
>
> Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-ipfw->melifaro
> Responsible-Changed-By: melifaro
> Responsible-Changed-Whe
Synopsis: [ipfw] [dummynet] [patch]: performance improvement and several
extensions
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-ipfw->melifaro
Responsible-Changed-By: melifaro
Responsible-Changed-When: Sun Jul 1 15:54:17 UTC 2012
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Take
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.
The following reply was made to PR kern/156770; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: "Alexander V. Chernikov"
To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org, al...@alter.org.ua
Cc:
Subject: Re: kern/156770: [ipfw] [dummynet] [patch]: performance improvement
and several extensions
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 201
The following reply was made to PR kern/156770; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Alter
To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org, Alter
Cc:
Subject: Re: kern/156770: [ipfw] [dummynet] [patch]: performance improvement
and several extensions
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:11:18 +0200
Hello bug-followup
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 04:00:28PM +, ??? ??? wrote:
> The following reply was made to PR kern/156770; it has been noted by GNATS.
>
> From: =?windows-1251?B?yu7t/Oru4iDF4uPl7ejp?=
> To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org, al...@alter.org.ua
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: kern/156770
The following reply was made to PR kern/156770; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: =?windows-1251?B?yu7t/Oru4iDF4uPl7ejp?=
To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org, al...@alter.org.ua
Cc:
Subject: Re: kern/156770: [ipfw] [dummynet] [patch]: performance improvement
and several extensions
Date: Sat, 28 Jan
Synopsis: [ipfw] [dummynet] [patch]: performance improvement and several
extensions
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-net->freebsd-ipfw
Responsible-Changed-By: ae
Responsible-Changed-When: Tue May 3 11:42:34 UTC 2011
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Seems it is related to ipfw.
h
Old Synopsis: [patch] dummynet and vnet use results in panic
New Synopsis: [ipfw] [dummynet] [patch] dummynet and vnet use results in panic
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-ipfw
Responsible-Changed-By: linimon
Responsible-Changed-When: Sun Feb 7 05:33:05 UTC 2010
Responsi
Thanks for reply Luigi!
I want to implements, but i dont know programming so good to modify
dummynet code.
My sugestions is because i love dummynet, i think that work great, but
need some improvements, to be more adaptable to different situations.
For moment will utilize, passing packets to mult
Hi,
> I know what is WF2Q, but still dont see what is the problem for wich
> dont't exist a possibility to limit bandwidth that is given to a
> queue, with queue settings.
> And exist a precedent, "queue" paramater that exist for pipe and
> queue.
> For example, if a "bw" parameter is not used for
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 07:20:26PM +0300, vladone wrote:
> I know what is WF2Q, but still dont see what is the problem for wich
> dont't exist a possibility to limit bandwidth that is given to a
> queue, with queue settings.
it not implemented because there is an equivalently efficient
mechanism w
I know what is WF2Q, but still dont see what is the problem for wich
dont't exist a possibility to limit bandwidth that is given to a
queue, with queue settings.
And exist a precedent, "queue" paramater that exist for pipe and
queue.
For example, if a "bw" parameter is not used for queue, then band
Hi,
> Yes, thanks! But is a little redundant and confused to pass packets to
> multiple pipe and queue. Isn't more elegant to put an option on queue
> that limit maximum bandwitdth to that queue (like "bw" option for pipe)?
> I dont know programming (not well), but i think that, can do the job,
>
Yes, thanks! But is a little redundant and confused to pass packets to
multiple pipe and queue. Isn't more elegant to put an option on queue
that limit maximum bandwitdth to that queue (like "bw" option for pipe)?
I dont know programming (not well), but i think that, can do the job,
if is put an su
Hi,
> Can someone make an patch for dummynet, so an user can't get maximum
> bandwith. Queue work great for sharing same bandwidth, but an user can
> get much banditdth if is not used but anothers.
> So is wonderfull if i can put an paramaters for queue (like for pipe),
> to limit bandwidth:
> For
Can someone make an patch for dummynet, so an user can't get maximum
bandwith. Queue work great for sharing same bandwidth, but an user can
get much banditdth if is not used but anothers.
So is wonderfull if i can put an paramaters for queue (like for pipe),
to limit bandwidth:
For example:
ipfw pi
19 matches
Mail list logo