| To: | Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] nfmark modify extension to classifiers |
| From: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | 12 Oct 2003 16:52:32 -0400 |
| Cc: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, Alexey <kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <1065988858.5373.11.camel@jzny.localdomain> |
| Organization: | jamalopolis |
| References: | <20031006002619.GC11250@rei.reeler.org> <1065479986.1102.3.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20031007012858.GF11250@rei.reeler.org> <1065988858.5373.11.camel@jzny.localdomain> |
| Reply-to: | hadi@xxxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
sorry, setting nfmark already works by virtue that the target for doing it exists; i.e "action ipt -j mark --set-mark xxx" cheers, jamal On Sun, 2003-10-12 at 16:00, jamal wrote: > On Mon, 2003-10-06 at 21:28, Thomas Graf wrote: > > Hello > > > > > This is a bad idea. > > > Please consider using the tc action extensions. > > > > You mean TC_POLICE_NFMARK? This was actually my initial idea > > but I wanted to avoid a dependency mess. > > > > I meant this: > http://www.cyberus.ca/~hadi/patches/action/README > > so you can do: > tc filter add dev lo parent ffff: protocol ip prio 10 u32 match ip src \ > 127.0.0.1/32 flowid 1:1 .... > action metaset classid 1:14 nfmark 0x10 ... > > > cheers, > jamal |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [PATCH SET][bonding 2.4] cleanup - take 3, Shmulik Hen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: patches for PROC_FS=n (2.6.0-test7), Randy.Dunlap |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [RFC] nfmark modify extension to classifiers, jamal |
| Next by Thread: | [PATCH] janitor: sched_timeout() sets curr_state (net/), Randy.Dunlap |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |