similar to: handle and u32 selector

Hi all, I saw that the u32 selector can match a PATTERN so I can use it to filter on a port value like : tc filter add dev eth0 parent 10;10 protocol ip prio 100 u32 match ip sport 0x0014 0xffff flowid 10:100 (filter on the ftp-data (20) source port) But is there a method to filter all the source ports > 40000 for example ? regards, ------------------------------------------------ Franck

Greetings all, I've setup a new gretap device as per Herbert Xu's new patches and it works as expected for smaller MTU. I'm wondering if gretap tunnels handle fragmentation at all or if this might be a bridge related issue. The same setup works quite well if I use vtun with a tap device however, so while this isn't entirely bridge-related, Maybe someone here might have

Hi all, I am trying to setup a configuration of Tinc to allow multiple tincd daemons for a same network (mixing bonding, etc...). I will post my solution later if I found one. This is to get better speeds in multiple gigabit/sec networks. So my question is not about this directly. I would like to know if the "netname" configured on each node, is used somewhere in communications

topology : two guest connected to physical LAN (vlan 620 and vlan 621) on host : 1) creating bridge br0 2) creating bridge for guest 1 and guest 2 - to separate traffic 3) virtual network1 : I have default NAT 192.168.122.x DHCP feeding IP to eth1 4) virtual network2 : I want to use 192.168.0.0 for eth0 my question is what would be my virtual network2 looks like : following is default xml :

Dear all, I''m new to traffic shapping although i have gone through marking and HTB queueing but i felt trouble in tc filter . I wonder if any one give me the hints about quantum or r2q. i guess quantum is used when two class has same prio and rate and want to give first priority between them and control the borrowing traffic. It should be set more than MTU too. But my

Hello all, As I have promised I am sending my QoS rules. This now works fine with u32 classifier (and parent 1:0 that I could not understand why it did not worked well before). Att, Nataniel Klug ------------------------ #!/bin/sh #------ # Script de QoS Cyber Nett #------ # Nataniel Klug # suporte@cnett.com.br #------ TC="/sbin/tc" IPT="/usr/local/sbin/iptables"

Hi to everybody I''m trying to use PRIO qdisc to prioritize the traffic but i have strange problem maybe I''m missing sometging. First i add root qdisc like this tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: prio it''s fine after this i try to match traffic by tos field but i get error invalid match tc filter add dev eth0 parent 1:0 prio 1 protocol ip u32 \ match ip tos 0x10 0xff

Hello, I try to add a U32 source port filter with libnl. My filter can be succesfully added with the library (no error occured) but the filter is not active. If I run "tc filter show dev eth0" I get: filter parent 1: protocol ip pref 100 u32 filter parent 1: protocol ip pref 100 u32 fh 800: ht divisor 1 filter parent 1: protocol ip pref 100 u32 fh 800::800 order 2048 key ht 800 bkt 0

Is it possible to negate the "match" to the ip? I want to match all traffic to dport 80 NOT going to dst 1.2.3.4: $TC filter add dev ${DEV_IFB} parent 1:0 prio 2 protocol ip u32 \ match ip protocol 0x6 0xff \ match ip dport 80 0xffff \ match ip dst 1.2.3.4/32 \ classid 1:14 I can''t find it in the docs. I tried "!" "\!" and "not" in several

Hello all, I am trying to make a filter into my QoS rules and I founded that when I try to use filters u32 and with fwmark they do not work together. This is the filter I use, just and example, for u32: $TC filter add dev $DL parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 u32 match ip sport 22 0xffff flowid 1:10 This is working fine. Now if I try to mark a package that I want it to go to the same

Hi, I am currently working on the TC. I have seen some behaviour which seems to be odd. I know someone in the mailing list would have seen this problem or may have some fix for this problem. When I try to include u32 filters with different priority or pref, I could see the filters being set on all the priority''s irrespective of the priority number. See my sample script below and the

hi I would like to ask is the following config correct for what I want to achieve ... Scenario: I have 3 networks 192.168.12.0/24, 192.168.48.0/24, 192.168.56.0/24 and most of the users use 1 IP, some of them more... If I make flat u32-filter search the box will make aprox/max 3 * 256 = 768 checks for every IP, so i''m deciding to deploy u32 hashes.. Here is the config I think to use

Hi guys I have a config as follows for one of my networks. I want to give the xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/xx network 64kbit for everything from the internet but 8000kbit from our internal servers on yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy/yy network. It does not work. I only want to use u32 filters. I think what's happening is the first flowid of 1:21 is catching them and not getting to the 1:40 flowid. Is this right? The box

I''m having trouble with nexthdr. tc filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 10:0 prio 1 u32 \ match ip protocol 0x6 0xff match u8 0x02 0x12 at nexthdr+13 flowid 10:3 fails to match my test packets whereas tc filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 10:0 prio 1 u32 \ match ip protocol 0x6 0xff match u8 0x02 0x12 at 33 flowid 10:3 does match them. Of course, the second one is really wrong

Hello.. How can I specify a class for htb based on a fwmark and user ip ? For instance: I have some routes marked with fwmark and their are very-high speed connections... But only to some IP''s.. For the rest , I must limit the user to 64Kbits Now , how can I limit the high speed connections ? I must create a rule and take in account both fwmark and IP ? To be more specific , I want

Hello, I''m having some trouble with the u32 port match and that is when specifying a mask. tc filter add prio 1 dev ppp1 parent 2:0 protocol ip u32 match ip dst 0.0.0.0/0 match ip protocol 17 0xff match ip dport 27015 0xffff flowid 2:4 Using 27015 0xffff works just fine, all packets to dport 27015 go to 2:4 tc filter add prio 1 dev ppp2 parent 2:0 protocol ip u32 match ip dst

hello... 1. Is it possible using u32 to filter marked packets? I have found only documents to fw filter to filter marked packets... 2. If u32 cannot filter marked packets is it possible to use fw and u32 together? I wanted to filter packets marked by iptables by fw, and packets depended on ip destination, src and others by u32, but something goes wrong :( the filters configuration is: $TC

hello to all i''m trying to set a filter but doesn''t want to work. i''ve set ut the qdiscs and the classes like this : tc qdisc add dev ppp0 root handle 1: htb default 20 tc class add dev ppp0 parent 1: classid 1:1 htb rate 120kbit tc class add dev ppp0 parent 1:1 classid 1:20 htb rate 30kbit ceil 120kbit tc class add dev ppp0 parent 1:1 classid 1:21 htb rate 30kbit ceil

Hi I''m doing traffic shaping with tc on ''10.0.0.0/30'' and ''10.0.0.28/30''. I want to delete part of shaping rules on the fly. (see my configuration at the end of this mail) I wan''t to delete the shaping for ''10.0.0.0/30'' on the fly while still keeping the shaping for part ''10.0.0.28/30'' running. When I for

PROBLEM: My filtering rules don''t seem to be working in the latest incarnation of my shaping script. I''ve changed from using multiple HTB classes to just one and a PRIO qdisc, and now my filters don''t seem to have any effect. OVERVIEW: What I used to have is pretty much the same as the htb wondershaper script (with some tweaks), which worked fine, but I noticed that my