From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Furniss Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 10:48:49 +0000 Subject: Re: [LARTC] four tc filter and netem questions Message-Id: <4295A991.6040101@dsl.pipex.com> List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: lartc@vger.kernel.org Alexey Toptygin wrote: > What is going on? Why are 2 entries created at first, That's normal output of tc filter ls - you may see more than 2 with u32 rules. then, if I delete > the one without a handle they both dissapear but I can't recreate the > one with the handle? Doesn't happen for me with 2.6.12-rc1 and latest iproute Why is it if I delete the one with the handle, it > is the only one deleted, and can be re-added and re-deleted just fine? > What are filter handles actually used for? They are not usually used, the "handle 1 fw" goes together to allow you to match marks, it's not so you can del specific filters - you would be better deleting the root qdisc and starting again if you need to change filters. Should I just omit the handle > to make everything better? > > Second, tc doesn't seem to want me to create filters without a filter > type, so how should I create a filter that will always match? i.e. I > want a prio 1 filter based on u32, then a prio 2 filter based on fw, > then a prio 3 filter that will match everything that the prio 1 and 2 > filters didn't get? ... u32 match u32 0 0 ... > > Thirdly, I haven't seen this actually written down anywhere, so I'd like > to double check: the fw filter matches any packet with non-zero fwmark > value, yes? Well you can't match 0 to mean unmarked like you can with iptables (you can also classify directly now with iptables -j CLASSIFY). For >0 the fw matches the mark you specify not any marked packet. Andy. _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc