| To: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] nfmark modify extension to classifiers |
| From: | Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 7 Oct 2003 03:28:59 +0200 |
| Cc: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, Alexey <kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <1065479986.1102.3.camel@jzny.localdomain> |
| References: | <20031006002619.GC11250@rei.reeler.org> <1065479986.1102.3.camel@jzny.localdomain> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
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 was going to write a generic metadata modifier action > (classid, tcindex, nfmark etc). Maybe you can beat me to it. I also thought about that, more specificly: Extend tcf_result and set nfmark/tcindex in tc_classify? There are so many solutions to this and I have no clue what is the best solution. Regards -- Thomas GRAF <tgraf@xxxxxxx> |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Strange UDP binding behavior (SO_BINDTODEVICE), Kevin Dwyer |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [PATCH] spinlock badness in last dongle changes., Stephen Hemminger |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [RFC] nfmark modify extension to classifiers, jamal |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [RFC] nfmark modify extension to classifiers, jamal |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |