Re: [LARTC] [PATCH] mark in u32

[Andy Furniss <andy.furniss@dsl.pipex.com>]

Thomas Graf wrote:
>>That looks handy :-) Do you know why fw mark doesn't work with policers 
>>in 2.6 (assuming it's not just me)
> 
> 
> Be prepared to see it removed again in favour of the meta extended
> match. Don't rely too much on it.

I searched a bit around meta data recently but couldn't find much - do 
you have any links?

> 
> Regarding fw, what exactly is not working? fw doesn't handle police
> results properly, the patchset at http://people.suug.ch/~tgr/patches/pending/
> fixes this. Given its another issue, I would be curious to know what
> exactly is not working.

It was for a test I did, though I notice some of the diffserv examples 
use it aswell (albeit with ipchains).

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=lartc&m\x110122532022827&w=2

> 
> 
>>ISTR having to mess about a bit last time when applying esfq patch to 
>>get it to work.
> 
> 
> Would you guys like to see esfq included in mainline?
> 

Yea - that would be great :-)

Andy.

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/