| To: | Asim Shankar <asimshankar@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Dynamically classifying flows? |
| From: | Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 08 Mar 2005 01:25:20 +0100 |
| Cc: | Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <7bca1cb505030716104856fe3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <7bca1cb505030709502316f9b8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050307203450.GX31837@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <7bca1cb505030716104856fe3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050106 Debian/1.7.5-1 |
Asim Shankar wrote: It is a likely scenario but usually not a problem because you can classify this kind of bulk packets by their size. u32 can be used use for such things or the newly added meta ematch.Filtering by size may not always work. An interactive flow may also generate big (MTU) size packets, but it is interactive because the _rate_ at which packets are produced is smaller. Though, if you think that such cases are purely theoretical and don't create problems in practice, do let me know. The connbytes and the connrate match from netfilter patch-o-matic can be used to dynamically reclassify demanding connections. Keep in mind that reclassification can cause reordering, so you should make sure it can't happen frequently for single connections. Regards Patrick |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [patch 1/1] remove last_rx update from loopback device, akpm |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Dynamically classifying flows?, Thomas Graf |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Dynamically classifying flows?, Asim Shankar |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Dynamically classifying flows?, Thomas Graf |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |