Your rules look good.
The only thing I can suggest is to play with priority numbers.

On 10/25/05, Erik Anderson <erikerik at gmail dot com> wrote:
>
> On 10/23/05, Erik Anderson <erikerik at gmail dot com> wrote:
> > Today I put a few rules in place to prioritize the packets going
> > to/from my VoIP box. They work well at ensuring clear calls, but I've
> > noticed that since adding the rules, the rest of my network traffic
> > has seemed to get quite a bit slower. I'm running the cdrom image of
> > m0n0-1.2 on a 400 MHz PC with 512 mb RAM. Here's my current ruleset:
> >
> > http://andersonfam.org/gallery2/d/13628-1/traf_shape.jpg
> >
> > I tried to take a simpler-is-better approach with one set of rules to
> > match the up/down VoIP traffic (dumped into a high-priority queue) and
> > one set to match everything else (dumped into a low priority queue).
> > My understanding was that the shaping would only really affect things
> > when there was VoIP traffic and that if there was no call going on,
> > traffic would flow as freely (minus a bit of CPU overhead) as before
> > the rules were put in place. I guessing that this assumption was
> > wrong. I've watched the CPU graph while browsing websites, and it
> > never gets above 2% or so, so the processing overhead isn't causing
> > the delay.
> >
> > Would anyone have a recommendation or two for rules I could add here
> > to retain the high-priority VoIP traffic, while improving the overall
> > response time of other network traffic?
>
> Bump.
>
> Any ideas here or am I on my own?
>
> Thanks-
> Erik
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
> For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
>
>