On Monday, May 29, 2006, at 10:48 US/Pacific, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
On 05/29/2006 07:02:40 AM, Steven Surdock wrote:
I found that cbq didn't borrow as aggressively as I expected.
Switching to the hfsc scheduler approached closer to what I wanted.
That does seem to be better, but I clearly am
On 05/29/2006 10:06:32 PM, Trevor Talbot wrote:
hfsc(linkshare) is what the bandwidth setting controls.
If hfc(linkshare) and bandwidth are the same thing,
then what happens if you specify both?
Karl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Free Software: You don't pay back, you pay forward.
--
On Tuesday, May 30, 2006, at 08:22 US/Pacific, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
On 05/29/2006 10:06:32 PM, Trevor Talbot wrote:
hfsc(linkshare) is what the bandwidth setting controls.
If hfc(linkshare) and bandwidth are the same thing, then what
happens if you specify both?
The hfsc(linkshare) value
Hi,
Is this the right place to ask this question?
Here's my pfctl -vvs queue output. I'm not doing much but
trying to send as much through the 'bulk' queue as possible,
but as you can see although it does borrow, it does not borrow
much. (I tried turning off red on the 'std' queue and that
On 5/28/06, Karl O. Pinc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is this the right place to ask this question?
Yes.
Is this the way it's supposed to work or am I missing something here?
(Id be happy to supply pf.conf but AFIK the queue layout is all
that's relevant. Some of my rules are just pass on $if
On 05/29/2006 04:28:49 AM, Travis H. wrote:
Queues are _only_ on outbound traffic.
I am queueing on outbound traffic, typing in was
a mistake. (Actually, I'm queueing both ways, using
an additional box. But that's neither here nor there
when it comes to what's happening with borrowing.)
I found that cbq didn't borrow as aggressively as I expected. Switching
to the hfsc scheduler approached closer to what I wanted.
-Steve S.
Karl O. Pinc wrote:
On 05/29/2006 04:28:49 AM, Travis H. wrote:
Queues are _only_ on outbound traffic.
I am queueing on outbound traffic, typing in
On 05/29/2006 07:02:40 AM, Steven Surdock wrote:
I found that cbq didn't borrow as aggressively as I expected.
Switching
to the hfsc scheduler approached closer to what I wanted.
That does seem to be better, but I clearly am not getting how
hfsc uses the 'bandwidth' parameter as it seems to
