From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jamal Subject: Re: some bug in iproute2 Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 10:28:05 -0400 Message-ID: <1249655285.7101.6.camel@dogo.mojatatu.com> References: <20090807101250.GA14064@ff.dom.local> Reply-To: hadi@cyberus.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Sergey Popov , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Jarek Poplawski Return-path: Received: from mail-yw0-f177.google.com ([209.85.211.177]:63239 "EHLO mail-yw0-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932291AbZHGOaG (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Aug 2009 10:30:06 -0400 Received: by ywh7 with SMTP id 7so2188694ywh.21 for ; Fri, 07 Aug 2009 07:30:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20090807101250.GA14064@ff.dom.local> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 10:12 +0000, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > On 06-08-2009 10:50, Sergey Popov wrote: > If you're using iptables > 1.4.2 then it's a known problem. > You can read more in a netdev thread: > Subject: iproute2 action/policer question > starting date: Tue, 09 Jun 2009 22:10:46 +0200 I am giving up on fixing it for that release for general distros. I will wait until iptables 1.4.4 becomes mainstream then i will make another fix. It is very hard to keep up concurently with a) apis changing randomly on the part of iptables b) distros picking random versions of iptables and c) iproute2 being released in random uncoordinated manner. Maybe a solution that would work is to fork iproute2 or make ipt part of iptables. In the meantime i can work with anyone who wants to get it to work with fixed version of iproute2 + iptables. Sergey, if this is of interest to you let me know. cheers, jamal