On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 10:24:56 -0800 Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > yes. however, nowhere do you say that traffic shaping isn't what you want. > > and I also wrote: > in your original post you seem to imply that a front for iptables is okay but > that you also don't want to do it with iptables. Now you imply that iptables > is not a solution? so I am contradicting myself. You did imply that traffic shaping isn't what you wanted. But you also implied that traffic-shaping IS what you wanted (by reference to iptables, a front-end to iptables and: > Hm, tell me again what traffic shaping is partially configured in? Right, > iptables. *sigh* ). So now I'm in a flame-war with myself. ;) You've got to admit its all a little contradictory and confusing as to what you really want. A
pgpavr20RBC7Y.pgp
Description: PGP signature
