Re: IMQ / new Dummy device post.

[Andy Furniss <andy.furniss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Andy Furniss wrote:
<snip>

> > To accomodate your need for b), the idea would be as follows:
> > packet gets demasquared, mark it with a fwmark
>
> I guess you really mean mark then demasquerade.
>
> > based on some recognition
> > you have for bittorent or squid and lastly policy route it to the dummy
> > device based on fwmark (since routing happens last).
> > I will need to modify the dummy to not drop such packets which are
> > fwmarked. 
>
> OK I can see this as a possibility - assuming I can mark. Maybe conmark 
> will be OK with connbytes sometime. I don't really know how to use it, 
> but if it is possible to mark egress connections in output and have 
> connmark match their incoming packets that would be a solution. I 
> haven't got a clue if connmark can do this, though, just speculating.
Hmm second thoughts - if I can route packets to dummy after demasquerade 
then I don't need to mark - I can use u32 as I do now to seperate per 
IP. Am I missing something here?
> Does anyone else know, and why it's not compatable with connbytes?
>
> Andy.
>
> > cheers,
> > jamal