To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaping/Bridge
On 3/22/07, Dimitri Rodis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not trying to beat a dead horse, but I am wondering if something
obvious has perhaps been overlooked here.
It has been said several times by the pfSense folks
On 3/22/07, Dimitri Rodis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course it's a code thing (what isn't ;) .. I was trying to gain some
technical insight as to why it doesn't function, and why it works with
NAT as opposed to a bridge. From my (I'm sure, oversimplified)
impression, if packets are passing
Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 9:28 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaping/Bridge
On 3/22/07, Dimitri Rodis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course it's a code thing (what isn't ;) .. I was trying to gain
On 3/22/07, Dimitri Rodis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't mean the traffic shaper *wizard*, I'm talking about the traffic
shaper itself. (I can config the rules myself if that means it will
function on bridged connections)
I know what you're asking. Since the wizard is the supported method
for us (and a couple of customers).
Thanks for the clarification.
-Original Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 1:31 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaping/Bridge
On 3/22/07, Dimitri Rodis [EMAIL PROTECTED