* Re: [LARTC] Route policy preference value
2004-08-02 9:00 [LARTC] Route policy preference value Ming-Ching Tiew
@ 2004-08-02 11:12 ` Sandro Dentella
2004-08-02 13:21 ` Martin A. Brown
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sandro Dentella @ 2004-08-02 11:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lartc
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 05:00:30PM +0800, Ming-Ching Tiew wrote:
>
> Assuming if I have rules matching the same packet,
> the one chosen is the lower preference value or
> the high ?
>
> For example
>
> # ip rule list
>
> ....
> 100 from 192.168.1.0/24 lookup main
> 200 from all fwmark 5 lookup first
> .....
>
for what I have understood is the lower, beware as pointed out to me from
Martin Brown that failing a matching *route* from rule 100 it will look for
the route in next matching *rule*. In my case I didn't defined default
route, but packets passed since arrived to get the one defined in main
table.
sandro
*:-)
--
Sandro Dentella *:-)
e-mail: sandro@e-den.it
http://www.tksql.org TkSQL Home page - My GPL work
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [LARTC] Route policy preference value
2004-08-02 9:00 [LARTC] Route policy preference value Ming-Ching Tiew
2004-08-02 11:12 ` Sandro Dentella
@ 2004-08-02 13:21 ` Martin A. Brown
2004-08-03 4:52 ` Ming-Ching Tiew
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Martin A. Brown @ 2004-08-02 13:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lartc
Ming-Ching,
: Assuming if I have rules matching the same packet, the one chosen
: is the lower preference value or the high ?
:
: For example
:
: # ip rule list
:
: ....
: 100 from 192.168.1.0/24 lookup main
: 200 from all fwmark 5 lookup first
: .....
:
: Packet is matching both rules, the one with priority/preference
: 100 or 200 is selected ?
The first matched rule in the routing policy database (RPDB) is the
one chosen. Rules are traversed from 0 to 32767. If a route match
is found for a given packet in a specified table, that route is
used. If no match is found in a given table, the
(sequential) traversal of the RPDB continues.
See also this description:
http://linux-ip.net/html/routing-selection.html#routing-selection-adv
Good luck,
-Martin
--
Martin A. Brown --- SecurePipe, Inc. --- mabrown@securepipe.com
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [LARTC] Route policy preference value
2004-08-02 9:00 [LARTC] Route policy preference value Ming-Ching Tiew
2004-08-02 11:12 ` Sandro Dentella
2004-08-02 13:21 ` Martin A. Brown
@ 2004-08-03 4:52 ` Ming-Ching Tiew
2004-08-03 5:41 ` Martin A. Brown
2004-08-03 5:49 ` Ming-Ching Tiew
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ming-Ching Tiew @ 2004-08-03 4:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lartc
> See also this description:
>
> http://linux-ip.net/html/routing-selection.html#routing-selection-adv
>
Ghee a simple illustration will explain it much better than
such a train of words.
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [LARTC] Route policy preference value
2004-08-02 9:00 [LARTC] Route policy preference value Ming-Ching Tiew
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2004-08-03 4:52 ` Ming-Ching Tiew
@ 2004-08-03 5:41 ` Martin A. Brown
2004-08-03 5:49 ` Ming-Ching Tiew
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Martin A. Brown @ 2004-08-03 5:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lartc
Ming-Ching,
: > http://linux-ip.net/html/routing-selection.html#routing-selection-adv
:
: Ghee a simple illustration will explain it much better than
: such a train of words.
Well...in that case...how do you feel about my pseudo-code locomotive?
You may well be right--I sometimes have a tendency to be verbose. I'll
see what I can do to imagine an accurate and intuitive diagram.
Thanks for the feedback,
-Martin
--
Martin A. Brown --- SecurePipe, Inc. --- mabrown@securepipe.com
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [LARTC] Route policy preference value
2004-08-02 9:00 [LARTC] Route policy preference value Ming-Ching Tiew
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2004-08-03 5:41 ` Martin A. Brown
@ 2004-08-03 5:49 ` Ming-Ching Tiew
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ming-Ching Tiew @ 2004-08-03 5:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lartc
>
> You may well be right--I sometimes have a tendency to be verbose. I'll
> see what I can do to imagine an accurate and intuitive diagram.
>
> Thanks for the feedback,
>
It's OK, i think I have figured out the answer. The system will
pick smaller no, meaning smaller no, higher preference.
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread