similar to: Equal bandwidth configuration among host with dummynet

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "Equal bandwidth configuration among host with dummynet"

2003 Jun 02
6
4.8-Stable DummyNet
Hi. We just opened a gaming center and have chosen to run a FreeBsd box for our firewall. IPFW is configured at it's very basic running natd through rl0 and allowing any to any connections from the lan to the outer world. Natd controls access to the lan. We have a 6.0 mb/s ADSL net connection for all the gaming clients to use, however if a gamer starts downloading a file, that file
2003 May 24
1
ipfirewall(4)) cannot be changed
root@vigilante /root cuaa1# man init |tail -n 130 |head -n 5 3 Network secure mode - same as highly secure mode, plus IP packet filter rules (see ipfw(8) and ipfirewall(4)) cannot be changed and dummynet(4) configuration cannot be adjusted. root@vigilante /root cuaa1# sysctl -a |grep secure kern.securelevel: 3 root@vigilante /root cuaa1# ipfw show 00100 0 0 allow
2004 Nov 09
2
Firewall rules that discriminate by connection duration
I'm interested in crafting firewall rules that throttle connections that have lasted more than a certain amount of time. (Most such connections are P2P traffic, which should be given a lower priority than other connections and may constitute network abuse.) Alas, it doesn't appear that FreeBSD's IPFW can keep tabs on how long a connection has been established. Is there another firewall
2003 May 07
4
IPFW Bandwidth throttling?
I am trying to limit outgoing SMTP traffic to about 14 Mbps and these are the IPFW rules I am using. ${fwcmd} add pipe 1 tcp from 192.168.0.0/24 to any 25 out via dc0 ${fwcmd} pipe 1 config bw 14Mbit/s I've tried multiple tweaks to the pipe rule and I seem to be missing something. I only get about half the bandwidth I specify. Is this normal behavior? Is there something wrong
2004 Feb 13
3
SYN Attacks - how i cant stop it
Hi, I got this error when i tried to type for some of those. "sysctl: unknown oid...." any idea.. my server seems to be very lagged, where else the network connection seems fine, i think BSD itself as my other redhat box is fine. What else can i do to get optimum protection. Thanks. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Per Engelbrecht" <per@xterm.dk> To:
2005 Nov 22
2
ipfw check-state issue
heya i've been using freebsd's ipfw for quite a while and recently on a new server i've got this issue with ipfw that i can't understand ... something is wrong ... 01000 8042 1947866 allow ip from any to any via fxp0 01010 0 0 allow ip from any to any via lo0 01014 9886 4170269 divert 8668 ip from any to any in via vr0 01015 0 0 check-state 01130 14679 5695969 skipto 1800 ip from
2013 Nov 19
3
ipfw table add problem
Hi, I'm using kernel FreeBSD 10.0-BETA3 #2 r257635 kernel. I am trying to add port number to ipfw tables. But there is something strange : Problem is easily repeatable. #ipfw table 1 flush #ipfw table 1 add 4899 #ipfw table 1 list ::/0 0 #ipfw table 1 flush #ipfw table 1 add 10.2.3.01 ( not 10.0.0.1, the last 1 has 0 as prefix ) #ipfw table 1 list ::/0 0 #ipfw table 1 delete ::/0
2003 May 28
1
FW: Question about logging.
I'm forwarding this to security@, as I'm getting no replies on ipfw@. Hope it's relevant enough for you :( ---Original Message----- From: owner-freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Erik Paulsen Skålerud Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 1:02 AM To: ipfw@freebsd.org Subject: Question about logging. Sorry for asking this, It's probably been
2003 May 31
3
Packet flow through IPFW+IPF+IPNAT ?
Hi. On my FreeBSD 4.8 configured IPFW2+IPF+IPNAT and I use them all: - IPFW - traffic accounting, shaping, balancing and filtering; - IPFilter - policy routing; - IPNAT - masquerading. I want to know, how IP-packets flow through all of this components? What's the path? incoming: IPFW Layer2 -> IPFW&Dummynet -> IPNAT -> IPFilter ? outgoing: IPFW Layer2 ->
2004 Feb 19
2
traffic normalizer for ipfw?
Hi there, Is there some way to configure ipfw to do traffic normalizing ("scrubbing", as in ipf for OpenBSD)? Is there any tool to do it for FreeBSD firewalling? I've heard that ipf was ported on current, anything else? TIA, /Dorin. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
2004 Dec 07
1
Adding latency
I use shorewall quite a bit, and I would like to know if the following is possible with shorewall or even with existing modules with iptables, etc. We want to be able to add latency to packets (foremost), not rate limiting but actually adding in a specified amount of latency, etc. It looks like dummynet for ipfw on FreeBSD will someone to do this easily. Can I do this on Linux via shorewall? --
2006 Apr 17
3
IPFW Problems?
Hi, I have a system with a 4.11 Kernel. Unless I'm doing something very wrong, there seems to be something odd with ipfw. Take the following rules: ipfw add 00280 allow tcp from any to any 22 out via bge0 setup keep- state ipfw add 00299 deny log all from any to any out via bge0 ipfw add 0430 allow log tcp from any to me 22 in via bge0 setup limit src-addr 2 ipfw add 00499 deny log
2003 Nov 21
1
how to get IPFW rules for SMTP server behind NAT server "right"? (freebsd-security: message 1 of 20)
-- On Friday, November 21, 2003 12:48 PM -0800 "David Wolfskill - david@catwhisker.org" <+freebsd-security+openmacnews+0459602105.david#catwhisker.org@spamgourmet.com> wrote: David, thanks for your reply! >> i've been struggling with setting appropriate rules for an SMTP-server >> behind by NAT'd firewall. > > OK.... <snip> > >>
2006 Jun 06
2
Need help on ipfw IDS support.
Hi, Is it possible to integrate SNORT with IPFW. I have an entire network behind an IPFW BRIDGE. Just need IDS capability enabled for the network. Just an hint is enough. Any other way I can achieve this in IPFW. -Sunil Sunder Raj
2009 Mar 17
1
ipfw and carp
Hi all: Did any one use ipfw with CARP before? is there anything specific about ipfw configurations working with CARP? I have two servers and they configured with CARP. they are working fine except i can't turn on ipfw. I have the exact same configuration except ip addresses; those same rule sets of ipfw work on one server but not on another. Thanks all
2006 Jan 26
7
strange problem with ipfw and rc.conf
Hi all: I have strange probelm with rc.conf. I set up ipfw (compiled into kernel) on freebsd-5.4 and it doesn't seem to load ipfw rulesets (it uses default ruleset 65335 locking out everything). I have to do "sh /etc/ipfw.rules" in order to load the rulesets, once I did that, I can access the box from remote locations here is my rc.conf: host# more /etc/rc.conf
2004 Feb 24
3
improve ipfw rules
>> 3. I'm intrested in blocking kazaa/P2P trafic with IPFW any help in this issue you could possibly block connections at known p2p ports. deny tcp from any to any 6699 step but most of the newer protocols use dynamic ports and in turn, are configurable. so ipfw isn't exactly ideal on it's own for this. -r. -----Original Message----- From: Pons [mailto:pons@gmx.li] Sent:
2005 Jan 13
1
Listening outside ipfw / program interface to ipfw
Hi, Two quick questions that I can't seem to find answers for using google. 1) is is possible to listen outside an ipfw firewall - that is have ethereal record the packets before ipfw starts dropping them? If so how? 2) Is there an api to ipfw that will let me manipulate rules, query stats etc? I need something faster than running the command line binary? Thanks John
2003 Nov 01
2
ipfw2 logging
Dear list! I have a little problem, trying to enable logging of deny rule. I have enabled it via kernel: options IPFIREWALL options IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE options IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE_LIMIT=3 It is ipfw2. After that, my inten- tion was to use syslogd and !ipfw *.* /var/log/ipfw.log and newsyslog with /var/log/ipfw.log 600 3 100 * J In rc.conf I have firewall_enable="YES"
2007 Dec 13
3
IPFW compiled in kernel: Where is it reading the config?
Hi peeps, After compiling ipfw into the new 6.2 kernel, and typing "ipfw list", all I get is: "65535 deny ip from any to any" From reading the docs, this might indicate that this is the default rule. (I am certainly protected this way--but can't be very productive ;^) ) By the way, when I run "man ipfw" I get nothing. Using this instead: