>Try protocol 8021q or whatever its number is -
Thanks Andy, this did the trick. And now for the next question.
802.1q is protocol number 0x8100. Therefore my filter lines look like this:
Tc filter add dev eth3 parent ffff: protocol 0x8100 prio 10 u32 match u32 0 0 flowid 1:1 action mirred egress redirect dev ifb0
What is the u32 matching on? Is it matching on IP headers, or is it matching on the protocol specified, ie the VLAN header?
For my particular application, I need to decide which IFB to redirect to based on combinations of both VLAN ID and IP src/dst addresses. Can I specify matches for the VLAN ID here? If so, I would presume that I can then use an Iptables mark to filter on, with that mark based on IP address? (ebtables can't match the IP address of a tagged packet, unfortunately.) Otherwise, I'm going to have to mark the packets with a VLAN ID using ebtables and then another mark from Iptables based on src/dst IP address. What a sodding nightmare.
Regards,
Leigh
Leigh Sharpe
Network Systems Engineer
Pacific Wireless
Ph +61 3 9584 8966
Mob 0408 009 502
Helpdesk 1300 300 616
email lsharpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
web www.pacificwireless.com.au
-----Original Message-----
From: lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 12:33 PM
To: Leigh Sharpe
Cc: lartc
Subject: Re: RE: IFB setup was no subject
Leigh Sharpe wrote:
> Seems that the example I gave actually works, but not the way I'm using it.
> I am bridging VLAN tagged packets,
Try protocol 8021q or whatever its number is - if there are other
protocol filters you will need a different prio or you will get an error.
but for some reason they are not being subjected to the rate limit. If I
pass normal, untagged packets through this setup, it behaves as
expected. However, once I put tagged packets through the bridge, it
fails to shape traffic.
> I don't want to have to use VLAN sub-interfaces, because the VLAN code strips the 802.1q tag from packets before they can be examined, which causes me problems in other areas.
Are these wireless customers?
I've never shaped wireless - do you get alot of extra loss from link
layer, what's the bandwidth, single duplex or is it round robin type?
I wonder if htb tweaked/untweaked/hfsc/policers could be better than cbq
- you may be able to get things better for link latyer, tcpdumps will
show you how bursty things are for users.
Andy.
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
