Re: Some more test on ingress, ifb, fwmark

Linux Advanced Routing and Traffic Control

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

 



Marco Gaiarin wrote:

Another question. my previous setup are rougly copied from:

	http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.cookbook.ultimate-tc.html#AEN2241

Ahh, wonder shaper. The trouble with that is I guess it was written before htb was even in kernel and maybe just adapted from some cbq version. It's also possible it's just a typo -

but it is flawed because the ${UPLINK}kbit and $[9*$UPLINK/10]kbit on the leafs will not be constrained by the parent - so go over limit.



and so for ingress i used to do:

	$TC filter add dev $IFACE parent ffff: protocol ip prio 50 \
	        u32 match ip src 0.0.0.0/0 \
	        police rate ${BI}kbit burst ${BURST}k drop flowid :1

now i do:

	tc filter add dev eth1 parent ffff: protocol ip prio 50 \
		u32 match ip src 0.0.0.0/0 \
		flowid :1 action mirred egress redirect dev ifb1

There's some way to ''combine'' these statement, eg have a ''police
rate'' and after a redirect?
  Looking at dhe docs, seems to me yes, but i've not found the correct
sintyax.

I don't see why you would want to. Policers are crude and you have ifb which you can shape properly on.

There may be a way using some of the more uncommon actions, but I am not sure.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lartc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


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