Re: Help please with tc and iptables mark

Linux Advanced Routing and Traffic Control

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Yippee! It worked :) 
I have tried on both kernels 2.6.10 and 2.6.11.6 and it's really sweet to see 
it works... BTW, in 2.6.11.6 when sch_ingress is loaded this message "Ingress 
scheduler: Classifier actions preferred over netfilter" appears in the log, 
which in 2.6.10 it's just silent, the feature is the same. I have tried with 
different marks for different kind of inbound traffic and the tests looked 
good. Man, I'm happy now :)

For the future search on this subject, bellow is my kernel config for "QoS 
and/or fair queueing" section (maybe there are lots to be removed):

#
# QoS and/or fair queueing
#
CONFIG_NET_SCHED=y
# CONFIG_NET_SCH_CLK_JIFFIES is not set
# CONFIG_NET_SCH_CLK_GETTIMEOFDAY is not set
CONFIG_NET_SCH_CLK_CPU=y
CONFIG_NET_SCH_CBQ=m
CONFIG_NET_SCH_HTB=m
CONFIG_NET_SCH_HFSC=m
CONFIG_NET_SCH_PRIO=m
CONFIG_NET_SCH_RED=m
CONFIG_NET_SCH_SFQ=m
CONFIG_NET_SCH_TEQL=m
CONFIG_NET_SCH_TBF=m
CONFIG_NET_SCH_GRED=m
CONFIG_NET_SCH_DSMARK=m
CONFIG_NET_SCH_NETEM=m
CONFIG_NET_SCH_INGRESS=m
CONFIG_NET_QOS=y
CONFIG_NET_ESTIMATOR=y
CONFIG_NET_CLS=y
CONFIG_NET_CLS_TCINDEX=m
CONFIG_NET_CLS_ROUTE4=m
CONFIG_NET_CLS_ROUTE=y
CONFIG_NET_CLS_FW=m
CONFIG_NET_CLS_U32=m
CONFIG_CLS_U32_PERF=y
# CONFIG_NET_CLS_IND is not set
CONFIG_CLS_U32_MARK=y
CONFIG_NET_CLS_RSVP=m
CONFIG_NET_CLS_RSVP6=m
# CONFIG_NET_CLS_ACT is not set
CONFIG_NET_CLS_POLICE=y

and  just to recap the versions used:
	iproute2-ss050318
	iptables v1.3.1
	gcc-3.4.3
	kernel custom built as per above versions


Thanks guys,
Adrian


> > There is alot of work going on with tc at the moment - There are/will be
> > lots more matches and the ability to run iptables commands from filters.
>
> ... Like matching the tc flows with iptables chains? that will be nice.
> I've seen some similar options in the kernel, but not sure how they work
> (i.e. CONFIG_NET_ACT_IPT); I couldn't find any doc (howto)...
>
> > I think with 2.6.10 you can still get the behaviour you want if you
> > don't select packet action in Qos and/or fair queuing of config - you
> > get to select a different policer then.
> >
> > CONFIG_NET_CLS_POLICE is the one you want if the other doesn't disappear
> > de select it aswell.
>
> I don't have CONFIG_NET_CLS_POLICE, but CONFIG_NET_CLS_ACT enabled and
> CONFIG_NET_ACT_POLICE as a module. If I disable CONFIG_NET_CLS_ACT there
> are few more that disappear. I'll try this right now (have to rebuild the
> kernel).
>
> > Andy.

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc

[Index of Archives]     [LARTC Home Page]     [Netfilter]     [Netfilter Development]     [Network Development]     [Bugtraq]     [GCC Help]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Fedora Users]
  Powered by Linux