From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarek Poplawski Subject: Re: iproute2 action/policer question Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 09:26:26 +0000 Message-ID: <20090617092626.GA11005@ff.dom.local> References: <20090615111927.GA12316@ff.dom.local> <20090617061458.GA9412@ff.dom.local> <20090617062846.GA9764@ff.dom.local> <200906171201.37727.denys@visp.net.lb> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: jamal , =?iso-8859-2?Q?Pawe=B3?= Staszewski , Linux Network Development list , Andreas Henriksson To: Denys Fedoryschenko Return-path: Received: from mail-bw0-f226.google.com ([209.85.218.226]:43987 "EHLO mail-bw0-f226.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751136AbZFQJ0a (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2009 05:26:30 -0400 Received: by bwz26 with SMTP id 26so164946bwz.7 for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2009 02:26:31 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200906171201.37727.denys@visp.net.lb> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:01:37PM +0300, Denys Fedoryschenko wrote: > On Wednesday 17 June 2009 09:28:46 Jarek Poplawski wrote: > > > > > > > I confirm I can't get 'action ipt -j MARK' working on debian lenny > > > (stable) with distro's iptables/tc. I'm not able to compile tc from > > > vanilla sources properly either - configure fails 3 IPT tests. (I > > > admit I can miss setting some (undocumented?) config variables.) So, > > > with or without debian, IMHO iproute2 needs some updates for iptables > > > 1.4.2, 1.4.3, and maybe even 1.4.4 now. > > > > OOPS! I _can_ configure it for 1.4.2 yet (so it's only about >= 1.4.3). > > > I check that, and found again many small changes in iptables, that screwed ipt > action in iproute2. > > I really think it doesn't worth to put too much efforts fixing it, with each > new release iptables. I switch to other way of "tagging" packets, skbedit, > and it seems it is also faster. If it were only about -j MARK you're 100% right. Other targets could be harder to replace - if they work of course ;-) Of course it's all up to Jamal, but on the other hand I'm really confused debian stable (or even testing) maintains such a broken state without any notice or simply disabling it to save people's time. Jarek P.