The matter here is not really about using parent or handle (wich I'm still not confortable with), but it is about the way a filter should be deleted.
In situations like mine I cannot just delete filters by parent, because parent qdiscs have dozens of child classes each one with a filter poiting to it. If I have to "disable a customer", for example, I need to delete its classes and consequently its filters, and today it is not possible.
Using Rodrigo's trick with prio is doing the job, but doesn't look like the right way to do it.
I'm not involved in tc, HTB or any other kernel-related development but in my user point of view the sintax to add and delete filters should be the same and when I delete a filter just that specific filter should be delete, not all those that have the same prio. Maybe there was some important problem during development that made it difficult or impossible to be this way, we don't know yet...
Just getting back to the basic sitation, when I try (supose classes 1:1 and 1:2 exist):
tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1: protocol ip prio 1 handle ::10 u32 match ip src 10.10.10.10 flowid 1:1 tc filter add dev eth1 parent 1: protocol ip prio 1 handle ::11 u32 match ip src 10.10.10.11 flowid 1:2
and then:
tc filter del dev eth1 parent 1: protocol ip prio 1 handle ::11
both filter are deleted... and it is supposed to delete just the second filter. With or without handle the same result is reproducible in my setup and in Rodrigo's too. Anybody else have the same behavior or it is just us? My kernel is 2.4.23.
Anyway filters are still a bit difficult to fully understand. There are too many undocumented options that should be described in Advanced-Routing-HOWTO or somewhere else...
Where is the active development of tc going on for 2.4? May we report it as a bug there?
Is the Advanced-Routing-Howto being updated? I would like to help with it... tc is doing such a good job here that I want to give something back to the community...
tks in advance...
Andre
Rodrigo P. Telles wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Lars,
It's about the discussion of "deleting filter rules", and this "method" (using
handle) was explaned by Patrick (see the list history).
Telles
Lars Landmark wrote:
| Hi;
|
| no clue :-(
| May I ask why you are using "handle" and not "parent" since HTB is used?
| And what eventually are the differences?
|
| Lars
|
|
|
|>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|>Hash: SHA1
|>
|>Lars,
|>
|>I knew that (I use this form, but with handle, it doesn't work), but if what you
|>said is truth, the folowing command would have work:
|>
|>tc filter del dev eth0 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle ::12 u32 match ip
|>src 10.10.10.10 flowid 1:12
|>RTNETLINK answers: No such file or directory
|>
|>|>tc filter add dev eth0 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 handle ::12 u32 match ip
|>src 10.10.10.11 flowid 1:12
|>
|>What you thing about that ?
|>
|>Telles
|>
_______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
