On 12/16/2015 4:27 PM, Karl Denninger wrote:
>> Protect some boxes via pf, and then limit one box from eating up all the
>> bandwidth when doing a backups and syncs.
>> I would like to keep pf for firewall rules, and I would like to use
>> ipfw+DUMMYNET for bandwidth shaping
>>
>>
>> ---Mike
>
On 12/16/2015 15:02, Mike Tancsa wrote:
> On 12/16/2015 3:22 PM, Karl Denninger wrote:
>> On 12/16/2015 14:20, Mike Tancsa wrote:
>>> I need to do some simple traffic shaping, but whenever I try and use
>>> altq, I dont seem to have any luck-- I mean zero.
>>>
>>> I like the management of pf via
On 12/16/2015 3:22 PM, Karl Denninger wrote:
>
> On 12/16/2015 14:20, Mike Tancsa wrote:
>> I need to do some simple traffic shaping, but whenever I try and use
>> altq, I dont seem to have any luck-- I mean zero.
>>
>> I like the management of pf via pf.conf, but miss the simplicity of
>> dummyn
On 12/16/2015 14:20, Mike Tancsa wrote:
> I need to do some simple traffic shaping, but whenever I try and use
> altq, I dont seem to have any luck-- I mean zero.
>
> I like the management of pf via pf.conf, but miss the simplicity of
> dummynet and ipfw. Has anyone used pf and ipfw together in
I need to do some simple traffic shaping, but whenever I try and use
altq, I dont seem to have any luck-- I mean zero.
I like the management of pf via pf.conf, but miss the simplicity of
dummynet and ipfw. Has anyone used pf and ipfw together in RELENG10 ?
Any tips / caveats ? Or am I better off
Hi.
Does anybody run recent 10-stable with working 6to4 connectivity?
A week ago I upgraded two systems where stf(4) is used. They were running
10-stable from beginning of September, with stf working fine. After
upgrade, the address on stf0 stays "tentative" indefinitely. So far, I've
not found a
