Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12

Started by Andrew

Version 2.9.4 (URGENT!) SOLVED!   12 February 2009, 07:15

I dont know why, but since I updated my version 2.8 to 2.9, one got the same error.

BWM is not managing traffic. In live monitor, I see only a few bytes from some rules (users). But they internet access is normal (not managed by bwm).

What I can do to fix it?

I already tried versions 2.9, 2.9.1 and now 2.9.4 > same problem.

In case you want, my rules: www.gaitatutor.com.br/rules.xml

Please, contact me if you want to enter in my BWM or windows remotely.

Thanks!
Mario Benvenuti

____________


SOLVED!

I dont know why, but when I mark "INVERT SOURCE ADDRESS" on each rule, it work fine.

In 2.8 version this is not needed.
SoftPerfect Support forum - Andrew avatar image

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   12 February 2009, 09:01

I would like to see your rules (as a screen shot) please. This might be a bug or normal behaviour.

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   12 February 2009, 13:49

What you mean screen shot? This?

[image]

Thanks for help anyway!
SoftPerfect Support forum - Andrew avatar image

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   12 February 2009, 19:19

Yes, but I don't see the Source column. Could you please make it visible and take another screen shot?

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   13 February 2009, 03:17

Yes. Screen shot updated.
[image]

In this case, all rules working with "Not Local" (source) only. But in version 2.8, Im using "Local:Any" in source and it working normally.
SoftPerfect Support forum - Andrew avatar image

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   13 February 2009, 08:47

That's really strange. Nobody else has reported this issue as yet, but if it works for you for some reason, that's OK.

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   19 February 2009, 11:43

Now I detected something strange too.

For all rules, when I see its statistics, in Daily Data, sent data is th same volume of received data in that day.

Eg:

14/02/2009 - Received: 44,3 MB / Sent 44,3 MB - TOTAL 88,6 MB
15/02/2009 - Received: 77,5 MB / Sent 77,5 MB - TOTAL 155 MB

Maybe this occurs because Im using "invert source address". Don´t know!

And more: In quota manager, when I put 2 values to initial and reduced rate, like 500000:100000 and 100000:10000, users access internet in slow value: eg: 100000 for initial rate, when correct is 500000. If I invert, put 100000:500000 for initial rate, people continue to access at 100000 (b/s).

Something wrong in my BWM sad Maybe in my rules...

Any idea? Can you enter in my BWM via internet to take a look? Or maybe via VNC. Help me using anyway you want! Thanks!

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   19 February 2009, 12:29

I think your problem is the interface setting in your filters? The most important part of the screen shots is missing (what "interface" the rules are applied on).

Do you have your rules set to "any interface"? That's what it sounds like, double packet processing therefore what comes in one interface is going out the other but showing up twice on the filter if it is set for "any interface" in opposite directions.

You might want to check this just to make sure, I've been caught out before when I've changed NIC's and BWM has changed the interface back to "any interface". I also use asymmetric rates and at the time it gave me the lowest rate set. If "any interface" is set, and you had a speed of say 384Kbps in 84Kbps out, then the users maximum speed will be the lower one, 84Kbps because even though he can download at 384Kbps the traffic going out the next NIC is limited in the opposite direction by 84Kbps out.

I hope that's what's happening and it sounds like it, so it should be solved once you're aware of it. Here's hoping!

Gavin.

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   23 February 2009, 22:44

Andrew,
I know the optimal way to have BWM set up is with placing all of your rules on the WAN sided NIC card, but every time I do I lose all connectivity.
I must keep them set to the "any interface" selection.
Question the "WAN network interface (IP)", is this the same as selecting my WAN NIC?
Moro666

I want to download v2.9.4 - or the latest version   24 February 2009, 06:32

Hi..
I'm trying this great software now, I downloaded v2.9.1
But I read here there is new versions , like 2.9.4 or 2.9.5
I can't find them !!

By the way, I know these versions still in Beta , and I'm willing to try smile
the last version I used was 2.7 - I see new Improvements in this Beta 2.9.x & really loves what you preparing to release.

what I downloaded , from this link [http://www.softperfect.com/special/sbm/bwm_setup_std_v2.9.1.exe]

I need the latest Beta...

Thanks

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   24 February 2009, 08:38

There is a link to the 2.9.4 version on the previous page (page 2) from Andrew.

Just replace the ".....1.exe" with .4.exe etc...

[http://www.softperfect.com/special/sbm/bwm_setup_std_v2.9.4.exe]

2.9.5 wasn't technically announced. But it is there and I have been using for a while now.

Gavin.
Moro666

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   24 February 2009, 10:00

WOW.. a fast replay smile
Thank you Kiwi_Rock

I'll get it..
Moro666

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   24 February 2009, 11:04

Hi..

Please check this scenario I noticed, and If I'm right .. see My suggestions.

The Scenario:

-I make a 1 Rule to control 20 user when they watch streaming media like YouTube.
-the rule limit was 100 kb/s ( as a whole limit for those 20 users if all or some of them watching YouTube)
- at (Dynamic Allocation) - I set limit by duration ( after 2 minuets = 120 sec) the limit decrease to 30%

I do that because I believe when a user just open a video , He can reach 100 kb/s & after 2 minutes He decreased to 30 KB/s
So, I think Most Users just see the beginning of the video , & don't complete it if he doesn't like it, So By this rule I save wasted /Unused bandwidth Because Most streams On YouTube Works fine with 50KB/s , But if the user stream this video with 100kb/s the whole video may get downloaded fast & then that user stops or switch to another video after 1 minute or less.

I Hope I say the above part clear to you...

So.. Back to BWM rule
I noticed this .. If 1 user go with Youtube.. the Rule works exactly as supposed.
during this time , & after 2 minutes the rule 'll decrease that user bandwidth to 30KB/s

If another user go to Youtube & stream a video , Both users will share the decreased limit = 30 kb/s
15KB/s for each

And that what I do NOT need..

I need that new user have full 100kb/s during first 2 minutes & then fall to 30 kb/s
so both users have total 60 kb/s (30 for each) & 40 kb/s is left for new third user(s).

I Know about the 10 seconds needed for a Rule to be restored to its main limit
if 2 users working with the same rule at the same time (during the 10 sec) they 'll share the same Duration limit.

This effect Rules that shared with multiple users ~ (Local IPs).

My suggestions:
- what about a Dynamic Rules
This mean just 1 rule can work with multiple users , & every user has its own limit / Dynamic limit
the queuing is done for every user separately through this rule.
(( I see this with another bandwidth controlling software , but 'll not mention its name here ))

- what about the 10 second needed for a Dynamic limit to be reset, can this be an option to enable/disable using this time or even change this time period ?

and I have another question, or something I need to be sure of:

If I use Dynamic limit for large transfers / duration , is this done for every single connection , or total connections.
I need to limit a certain file download speed, but not limit the whole user bandwidth using just 1 rule.
--------------------------------------------

another question not related to above :
* is addressing by Domain name is supported ??

* if I add domain name as a remote destination ( limiting a site or server )
So.. I added for example [ yahoo.com ]
is the child domain [mail.yahoo.com] gonna be limited to ???

If Not, it's nice to support this, 'll make it easy to deal with addresses needed to be limited.


Thanks.. & sorry for long post.

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   24 February 2009, 13:02

I enjoyed reading that post. I'm sure Andrew will appreciate the thoughts and suggestions.

I understand what you mean about users starting to watch a video, then get rid of them before playing all of it! That was my biggest congestion problem. I even do that myself. That's why I imposed 384Kbps downstream on each user. I also picked 384Kbps because it's exactly 256, 1500 byte packets, although I don't know if that helps since it's all time based? I found that if my upstream provider has a bad day, the videos stop and buffer once towards the beginning of playback sometimes. I haven't gone much higher in test because when a user starts downloading as high as the filter can go, the surge can be well over 500Kbps briefly so I'm a little reluctant to go much higher than 400Kbps. Because a surge can cause problems with my UDP voice traffic. I have a second filter on another interface limiting all non-voice traffic to a max 1Mbps over my Wi-Fi network.

It sounds like quite a few people at times need a filter that applies to each IP in a group individually rather than the same, without having to create a bunch of filters. I have to use individual filters because I need to account for all network traffic at an individual level as I use a quota based system, but sounds like a good idea.
Moro666

Version 2.9.4 PLEASE HELP   25 February 2009, 10:36

Hi,

I Uninstalled v2.9.1 to install v2.9.4
The un-installation process ends with no problem , then I Restart my system.
when I start installing the new version 2.9.4 it told me that I have an old version installed, & I have to Un-install it first & restart system !!!!

when I try to switch back to v2.9.1 , it tells me the same thing

what can I do now to fix this ??

Please I need help here...
waiting for replay .. I'm online

Version 2.9.4 PLEASE HELP   25 February 2009, 11:25

Sounds like this problem again:

See this thread


That should work.
Moro666

Version 2.9.4 PLEASE HELP   25 February 2009, 13:26

Yes, it's exactly the same problem...

1- and Yes , deleting registry values , make the installer work.

2- and Yes , after first install, I restarted, & my CPU speaker peeped , when I go to services.msc & try to restart the BWM service it say "it can't find a file"
Reinstalling again fix this

By the way, the second problem happened when I installed 2.9.1 , & also fixed by reinstalling.
------------------------------------------------------

about the new feature of not limiting Local lan traffic, when I was trialing 2.9.1 I noticed there is no option for that, but my local traffic never be limited,!!! or I miss something here ?!!!

I clearly remember that I transfer shared files between BWM machine & others, transfer speed was ~7 MB/s

Anyway, I'll try this feature again, and see whats new,

Thanks, kiwi_rock for your great support that you given me smile
Moro666

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   26 February 2009, 16:07

Hi,,
I think I found somthing need to be fixed..

when I activate "Enable web-access to usage roports" with listen Port=80 .. it works fine

But I have something else using Port 80, so I changed it to Port 8080

It doesn't work,
When I checked this option again, I found that Port value present in this format [ 8,080 ]

First I think that I typed it wrong, so I try again with Port 4040
when I just Press OK & reopen "settings" again, it was [4,040] , NOT [4040]

I tryed Port [40] , it works fine
I tryed Port [123] , it works fine

So,, Any Port consists of 4 digits (OR MORE) failed & converted to [x,xxx] or [xx,xxx] format.
Tony

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   27 February 2009, 11:29

I use port 8080. It displays it as 8,080 in BWM but is really good 'ol port 8080.

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   27 February 2009, 14:28

I use 8083 and works fine too...

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   28 February 2009, 02:17

I tried different rules types but nothing work. If I put something different from Any Interface in the rule, it don´t work. I don´t know how to do it... I tried too many different ways but nothing work...

Maybe could you help me giving me some example, or take a look in my rules to know whats wrong.

Thanks kiwi!
Mario.

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   28 February 2009, 09:55

This is a stripped down version of my setup:

NICS:

"192.168.1.1" connects to external NAT Internet ADSL router over a bridged Wi-Fi link.
"192.168.4.1" not connected.
"192.168.5.1" connects to my LAN.
"192.168.6.1" connects to my PPPoE server / to another Wi-Fi access point.

First I have a "group" called "local" with the IP ranges 192.168.1.0-255, 192.168.4.0-255, 192.168.5.0-255, 192.168.6.0-255. If I'm not using the local LAN traffic option in the newer BWM 2.9.4/5 then I have a filter on interface "192.168.5.1" with source group local and destination group local, Any IP based and the first filter in the list on that Interface. The same thing again on interface "192.168.6.1" and another filter the same on interface "192.168.1.1". It has a speed cap of 5120000:5120000 to allow for 5Mbps local traffic between subnets (I only have around 8Mbps on my Wi-Fi backhaul).

I have filters loaded on interface "192.168.5.1" using MAC address as source, destination any ip:any port with an asymmetric rate 84000:384000, using Any IP based. I have one filter for each client. This gives LAN clients 84Kbps upstream and 384Kbps downstream Internet access by means of a quota.

I have filters by IP source address on interface "192.168.6.1", with destination any ip:any port with Any IP based protocol. They also use quota's and the same asymmetric speed for Internet access. I assign static IP's via PPPoE so I don't need to use MAC on this interface.

I have a single filter on interface "192.168.1.1" with a rate of 3072000:384000 source any ip destination any ip, Any IP based protocol. This caps the total Internet bandwidth to 3Mbps download and 384Kbps upload for ALL traffic to the Internet router that's not local.

I have NO "any interface" filters. If I did, I would have speed problems limiting all traffic to 84Kbps or a host of other problems.

I just have BWM running on a Windows 2000 workstation and works great.

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   28 February 2009, 10:05

Can you do a screen shot of your different "groups" and perhaps go to the command line and do this aswell:

ipconfig /all > c:\ipconfig.txt
route print > c:\route.txt

Then post those files aswell for me to look at?

Cheers,
Gavin.
SoftPerfect Support forum - Andrew avatar image

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   02 March 2009, 03:34

Oh guys, you have written so much while I was on a holiday smile Let me briefly answer the raised questions:

Quote

Moro666

- what about a Dynamic Rules
This mean just 1 rule can work with multiple users , & every user has its own limit / Dynamic limit
the queuing is done for every user separately through this rule.
(( I see this with another bandwidth controlling software , but 'll not mention its name here ))


That software must be BC. Yes, you are right about the above and dynamic rules. This feature has been asked several times and it will be implemented. The only thing I am unsure now is what to do with quotas if a dynamic rule is bound to a quota. Perhaps it makes sense to hold the quotas attached to dynamic rules in memory as it may need to be deleted once the rule expires.

Quote

Moro666

- what about the 10 second needed for a Dynamic limit to be reset, can this be an option to enable/disable using this time or even change this time period ?


Certainly.

Quote

Moro666

another question not related to above :
* is addressing by Domain name is supported ??

* if I add domain name as a remote destination ( limiting a site or server )
So.. I added for example [ yahoo.com ]
is the child domain [mail.yahoo.com] gonna be limited to ???


Not supported yet. In the mean time, if you'd like to limiting a site (or in case of a large site a network), you have to find out its IP address and network block. For example, let's suppose we want block yahoo.com. You can use this Smart WhoIs servce, which tells us that Yahoo uses a network block 206.190.32.0 - 206.190.63.255. Now this IP address range can be specified in a rule.

Quote

Moro666

when I start installing the new version 2.9.4 it told me that I have an old version installed, & I have to Un-install it first & restart system !!!!


I remember this problem. I will check it out, it seems to be happening where users upgrade from 2.8 to 2.9.2 and higher on specific versions of Windows.

Quote

Tony

I use port 8080. It displays it as 8,080 in BWM but is really good 'ol port 8080.


Fixed in 2.9.6 (this was annoying thousands separator).
Moro666

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   02 March 2009, 10:46

Hi, Andrew

it was Long holiday, man smile
but I hope it was a nice one

While u in holiday, I was a new user here smile & really like what u r doing about BWM

I still trialing it , & will prepare some feature request later.

I was using BC. for long time , & almost got it's Good & bad things , I don't like my self when talking about bad things of other software here, But I'll tray to hold the good things of others to be implemented in BWM.

& really the first thing I noticed here ( and before even trialing BWM), is your great support the u gave to people here, & fast respond to implement the new fix to your Bitas

Good Luck

for instance, is there any way to implement some method to let BWM be able to process its control on tape of files ?

EX.
I want to limit (FLV) extension, or (RAR, ZIP, AVI, WMV, MP3) , BUT not limit (JPG, SWF, TXT, PDF)

sound nice, huh ? smile

what you think ?
SoftPerfect Support forum - Andrew avatar image

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   04 March 2009, 09:45

You mean restrict downloads over HTTP with a specific sort of files? Well, this is normally done at a proxy server. Some customers use Squid as a transparent proxy. They use BWM to route HTTP traffic to Squid and deal with wanted and unwanted downloads tuning the proxy server's configuration.

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   04 March 2009, 16:14

Thanks for your help! I was changed my rules changing "Any Interface" to correct local lan interface name. Anyway I continue need to use option "Invert Source Address" in all rules. Is this normal?

I don´t know why this happen in this version (2.9) and in 2.8 it working normally sad
Tony

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   27 March 2009, 09:30

Andrew re the drivers and making it possible to go back to the original drivers during install.

I am using 2.9.6 and can't find anything like this yet.

Do you have any indication when this might be available, the wait is killing me and I might have to go back to 2.8 temporarily and lose all those cool features I love.
SoftPerfect Support forum - Andrew avatar image

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   27 March 2009, 14:28

Hi Tony,

Is this because the PRTG sniffer does not see traffic with the new drivers? What version and edition (32 / 64-bit) of Windows are you using? I'd like to try reproducing the problem.
Tony

Version 2.9.1 preview from November 12   28 March 2009, 09:26

Yep exactly Andrew, PRTG sees no traffic, and after a few minutes the BWM stops passing traffic.

I am using Windows XP with service pack 3

you can get the PRTG here


http://www.paessler.com/prtg6/download

Use the free version for the tests.

The SNMP probes in PRTG continues to work ok but when sniffing on one of the interfaces also used by the BWM it fails as per above. This worked ok up till version 2.9.1question and definitely ok on 2.8. When I remove PRTG the BWM works ok again, when I remove the BWM, PRTG is ok.

Let me know if you need more info.


thanks

Reply to this topic

Sometimes you can find a solution faster if you try the forum search, have a look at the knowledge base, or check the software user manual to see if your question has already been answered.

Our forum rules are simple:

  • Be polite.
  • Do not spam.
  • Write in English. If possible, check your spelling and grammar.

Author:

Email:

Subject

A brief and informative title for your message, approximately 4–8 words:

     

Spam prevention: please enter the following code in the input field below.

  *******    *******   **        ********   ******** 
 **     **  **     **  **        **     **  **    ** 
 **         **     **  **        **     **      **   
 ********    ********  **        ********      **    
 **     **         **  **        **     **    **     
 **     **  **     **  **        **     **    **     
  *******    *******   ********  ********     **     

Message: