LARTC - Jan 2006 - match mark problem still resists

Dear All

I am kinda frustrated with the lack of help some developers are dispensing to
this
problem (read ignoring it).

A few days ago (december 22th) I reported a problem with ''tc filter
match mark''
against 2.4 kernel series and got no answers that could lead me to any solution.

This is a steady problem that occurs in kernel 2.4 series and match mark (at
least for me).

I browsed thru the source codes but run thru a wall of bricks at some point.

I have a single question to developers of TC: Isn''t it strange that my
problem
be related to the only match inside ''parse_selector'' that is
treated
differently from other matches? 

All except ''mark'' is parsed like parse_xxxx(&argc,
&argv, sel, ..) and mark is
parsed parse_mark(&argc, &argv, n,..) where sel is a struct tc_u32_sel
and n is
a struct nlmsghdr. 

I should say that this deserves at least an "You idiot, you are using it
the
wrong way. Do like this and stop bothering me!" answer.

Sorry my tempestuous attitude.

Frustratedly

-- 

Ethy H. Brito         /"\
InterNexo Ltda.       \ /  CAMPANHA DA FITA ASCII - CONTRA MAIL HTML
+55 (12) 3941-6860     X   ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN - AGAINST HTML MAIL
S.J.Campos - Brasil   / \

Ethy H. Brito wrote:
> I am kinda frustrated with the lack of help some developers are dispensing
to this
> problem (read ignoring it).
You should report it to a list that it actually read by developers,
namely netdev@vger.kernel.org.

Hi there,...
I know this topic may not belongs to this list, but it is crucial for me 
to get packets marked on this VoIP application.

The diagram to understand the problem is showed on the next line...

VoIP SIP phone+GW >---->eth0[SERVER1]eth1, tun0>--->( 
INTERNET-VPN)>--->eth1,tun0[SERVER2]eth0---->VoIP SIP phone+GW.
                                                     MARKER
Just by knowing that VoIP Gateways are configured to establish a 
incoming call connection through the ports interval 16384:16482. So then 
the fact that one of the phones get a port from that interval depends on 
which of them calls..., it''s suposed that SERVERS do ip forwarding,
does
it means port forwarding too? 
What should be the best way of marking packets with iptables in the 
right case SERVER1 is the packet marker?? Should i mark them by IP 
address and forget about ports?

-Thanks

Diego