traffic management

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
22 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

traffic management

irix
Hello Misc,

Are there any plans have changed in the system of traffic control?
For example removal of code altq from pf and make a separate management interface traffic other than pf.
Or replace altq to something else, more fast,
simple and functional. Or revision of an existing traffic management system.

--
Best regards,
 irix                          mailto:[hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

Insan Praja SW
Hi,
On Wed, 02 Jun 2010 00:21:16 +0700, irix <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello Misc,
>
> Are there any plans have changed in the system of traffic control?
> For example removal of code altq from pf and make a separate management  
> interface traffic other than pf.
> Or replace altq to something else, more fast,
> simple and functional. Or revision of an existing traffic management  
> system.
>

I love ALTQ integration to PF, and IMHO, ALTQ works just fine. Do you have  
any problem with altq?

HTH,

--
insandotpraja(at)gmaildotcom

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

Jan Stary
In reply to this post by irix
On Jun 01 20:21:16, irix wrote:
> Hello Misc,
>
> Are there any plans have changed in the system of traffic control?
> For example removal of code altq from pf and make a separate management interface traffic other than pf.
> Or replace altq to something else, more fast,
> simple and functional. Or revision of an existing traffic management system.

obvious troll is obvious

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

Theo de Raadt
> > Hello Misc,
> >
> > Are there any plans have changed in the system of traffic control?
> > For example removal of code altq from pf and make a separate management interface traffic other than pf.
> > Or replace altq to something else, more fast,
> > simple and functional. Or revision of an existing traffic management system.
>
> obvious troll is obvious

no kidding.  As we've told "irix" before, it will not happen.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

James Peltier
Ouch.  I like IRIX.  ex-SGI employee 43951. :)

 ---
James A. Peltier     [hidden email]



----- Original Message ----

> From: Theo de Raadt <[hidden email]>
> To: Jan Stary <[hidden email]>
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Sent: Tue, June 1, 2010 2:40:37 PM
> Subject: Re: traffic management
>
> > > Hello Misc,
> >
> > Are there any plans have
> changed in the system of traffic control?
> > For example removal of
> code altq from pf and make a separate management interface traffic other than
> pf.
> > Or replace altq to something else, more fast,
> >
> simple and functional. Or revision of an existing traffic management
> system.
>
> obvious troll is obvious

no kidding.  As
> we've told "irix" before, it will not happen.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

irix
In reply to this post by irix
Hello Misc,

 But at least you can say why?

>no kidding.  As we've told "irix" before, it will not happen.

--
Best regards,
 irix                          mailto:[hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

bofh-6
Isn't the onus on the one asking for change to list why it should be
changed, and to contribute the code to show why your approach is
superior, since Theo has apparently told you before it ain't
happening?

On 6/1/10, irix <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello Misc,
>
>  But at least you can say why?
>
>>no kidding.  As we've told "irix" before, it will not happen.
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  irix                          mailto:[hidden email]
>
>

--
Sent from my mobile device

http://www.glumbert.com/media/shift
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk
"This officer's men seem to follow him merely out of idle curiosity."
-- Sandhurst officer cadet evaluation.
"Securing an environment of Windows platforms from abuse - external or
internal - is akin to trying to install sprinklers in a fireworks
factory where smoking on the job is permitted."  -- Gene Spafford
learn french:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30v_g83VHK4

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

Tony Abernethy
In reply to this post by irix
Why?
(There, I said it.)

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
irix
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 7:38 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: traffic management

Hello Misc,

 But at least you can say why?

>no kidding.  As we've told "irix" before, it will not happen.

--
Best regards,
 irix                          mailto:[hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

Gregory Edigarov-2
In reply to this post by irix
On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 03:37:35 +0300
irix <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello Misc,
>
>  But at least you can say why?
Obvious: don't fix what's not broken.
>
> >no kidding.  As we've told "irix" before, it will not happen.
>


--
With best regards,
        Gregory Edigarov

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

Francesco Vollero
Gregory Edigarov ha scritto:

> On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 03:37:35 +0300
> irix <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>  
>> Hello Misc,
>>
>>  But at least you can say why?
>>    
> Obvious: don't fix what's not broken.
>  

Gregory, its an hard concept to get by most of the people :)


>>> no kidding.  As we've told "irix" before, it will not happen.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

SJP Lists
In reply to this post by irix
2010/6/2 irix <[hidden email]>:
> Hello Misc,
>
>  But at least you can say why?
>
>>no kidding.  As we've told "irix" before, it will not happen.
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  irix                          mailto:[hidden email]

Because it makes my VoIP phones at home and a friends workplace go
from hit-and-miss to... "ohh yeah, that's right, we're using VoIP now!
 I forgot!", every time I receive a bill from my PSTN Telco with $0
for phone calls (for the past years).  ie, pf/altq works so well for
me that VoIP becomes so well behaved that I forget I'm even using it,
even when uploads and downloads are going like the clappers.

Once I go ADSL2+ Naked, then I hopefully won't be getting bills from
that crusty money grubbing old Telco ever again, so I might almost
completely forget how much pf/altq rocks (until "obvious troll is
obvious" comes back of course).

So, like others have said, it seems pretty far from broken to me.

Maybe you have mis-configured it.


Shane

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

irix
In reply to this post by irix
Hello Misc,

  All of a sudden started talking about some fixes. Have I mentioned somewhere that something needs to be corrected,
   or that something is not working? I just said about remaking to simplify the code.
 Alternatives queue was initially conceived as framework in which you can with minimal effort to connect disciplines
  to develop. With the existing code in the form pf/altq add a new discipline has been a daunting task, you need a heap of places to dopiski indicate the new variables need to finish the new syntax.
  I simply asked why the code altq not do the same as the code nat / rdr, scrub to remove it and greatly simplified.
   As an option to make altq separately from firewall.

--
Best regards,
 irix                          mailto:[hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

irix
In reply to this post by irix
Hello Misc,

  Ideally this control altq the similarity in the tc tool in Linux.

--
Best regards,
 irix                          mailto:[hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

Theo de Raadt
In reply to this post by irix
>   All of a sudden started talking about some fixes. Have I mentioned somewhere that something needs to be corrected,
>    or that something is not working? I just said about remaking to simplify the code.
>  Alternatives queue was initially conceived as framework in which you can with minimal effort to connect disciplines
>   to develop. With the existing code in the form pf/altq add a new discipline has been a daunting task, you need a heap of places to dopiski indicate the new variables need to finish the new syntax.
>   I simply asked why the code altq not do the same as the code nat / rdr, scrub to remove it and greatly simplified.
>    As an option to make altq separately from firewall.

Where's the diffs?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

Janne Johansson-3
In reply to this post by irix
2010/6/2 irix <[hidden email]>

> Hello Misc,
>
>  All of a sudden started talking about some fixes. Have I mentioned
> somewhere that something needs to be corrected,
>   or that something is not working? I just said about remaking to simplify
> the code.
>

You said: "Or replace altq to something else, more fast, simple and
functional."
It is not a stretch to assume you imagined altq to not be fast, nor simple
and not even functional.

--
To our sweethearts and wives.  May they never meet. -- 19th century toast

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

Theo de Raadt
In reply to this post by irix
>   Ideally this control altq the similarity in the tc tool in Linux.

It is not going to happen.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

Andreas Mueller-7
In reply to this post by irix
irix wrote:
> Hello Misc,
>
>   Ideally this control altq the similarity in the tc tool in Linux.
Who would want this? This was the main reason for me to switch my
routers to OpenBSD. (consistency, ease of configuring)
I didn't want to fiddle with iptables and tc, search in outdated
tc documentations or make (or use) huge scripts just to set a sane firewall-trafficshaping with a little extensibility. The native OpenBSD tools are just fine.

(wifi-configuration's the same)

Andreas

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

bitfrost
In reply to this post by Janne Johansson-3
2010/6/2 Janne Johansson <[hidden email]>:

> 2010/6/2 irix <[hidden email]>
>
>> Hello Misc,
>>
>>  All of a sudden started talking about some fixes. Have I mentioned
>> somewhere that something needs to be corrected,
>>   or that something is not working? I just said about remaking to simplify
>> the code.
>>
>
> You said: "Or replace altq to something else, more fast, simple and
> functional."
> It is not a stretch to assume you imagined altq to not be fast, nor simple
> and not even functional.
>
> --
> To our sweethearts and wives.  May they never meet. -- 19th century toast
>
>

For MY personal opinion, using altq was the easiest thing and well
documented(I came from Linux world) it even work with an eye
glimpse....

Like this some day "someone" will say: "Why not use GPL license???"...

--
Atentamente

Andris Genovez Tobar / Sistemas
Elastix ECE - Linux  LPI-1 - Novell CLA - Apple ACMT
Jabber:      [hidden email]
http://www.crice.org

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

Theo de Raadt
In reply to this post by Andreas Mueller-7
> > Hello Misc,
> >
> >   Ideally this control altq the similarity in the tc tool in Linux.
> Who would want this? This was the main reason for me to switch my
> routers to OpenBSD. (consistency, ease of configuring)
> I didn't want to fiddle with iptables and tc, search in outdated
> tc documentations or make (or use) huge scripts just to set a sane firewall-trafficshaping with a little extensibility. The native OpenBSD tools are just fine.
>
> (wifi-configuration's the same)

Well, Andreas, don't worry -- it won't be changing.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: traffic management

SJP Lists
In reply to this post by irix
2010/6/3 irix <[hidden email]>:
> Hello Misc,
>
>  Ideally this control altq the similarity in the tc tool in Linux.
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  irix                          mailto:[hidden email]

Nobody here is stopping you from using Linux.

12