From owner-freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Mon Dec 11 01:59:56 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C605E82572 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 01:59:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEB366BF64 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 01:59:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id vBB1xtIS076100 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 01:59:55 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 224231] [ipfw] kernel panic when using ipfw nat Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 01:59:56 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: assigned_to Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 01:59:56 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D224231 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org |freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.org --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Mon Dec 11 08:38:43 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77355E8A836 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 08:38:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64D287791F for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 08:38:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id vBB8ch6Z098645 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 08:38:43 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 224231] [ipfw] kernel panic when using ipfw nat Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 08:38:43 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: ae@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 08:38:43 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D224231 Andrey V. Elsukov changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |ae@FreeBSD.org --- Comment #1 from Andrey V. Elsukov --- This should be fixed after r326142. As workaround use "ip4" opcode for NAT rules. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Wed Dec 13 09:46:12 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA354E982EA for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:46:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B7C126A12B for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:46:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id vBD9kBah028609 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:46:12 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 224231] [ipfw] kernel panic when using ipfw nat Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:46:11 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: ae@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: Closed X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: resolution bug_status Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:46:12 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D224231 Andrey V. Elsukov changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|New |Closed --- Comment #2 from Andrey V. Elsukov --- Fixed in head/ and stable/11. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Fri Dec 15 20:36:00 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E50EE8C2E9 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 20:36:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from david@catwhisker.org) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0615564B92 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 20:36:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from david@catwhisker.org) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 0299BE8C2E7; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 20:36:00 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ipfw@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 023FDE8C2E6 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 20:36:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from david@catwhisker.org) Received: from mx.catwhisker.org (mx.catwhisker.org [198.144.209.73]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ABB5964B91 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 20:35:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from david@catwhisker.org) Received: from albert.catwhisker.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by albert.catwhisker.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id vBFKZvoG077978 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 20:35:57 GMT (envelope-from david@albert.catwhisker.org) Received: (from david@localhost) by albert.catwhisker.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id vBFKZvjo077977 for ipfw@freebsd.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 12:35:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from david) Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 12:35:57 -0800 From: David Wolfskill To: ipfw@freebsd.org Subject: ipfw(8) and additional scheduling algorithm specifications Message-ID: <20171215203557.GN1179@albert.catwhisker.org> Reply-To: ipfw@freebsd.org, David Wolfskill MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="KqgzcibYR01ijRX/" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 20:36:00 -0000 --KqgzcibYR01ijRX/ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I've started looking into configuring ipfw & dummynet to see if FQ-CoDel might improve things for my home Internet connection (residential ADSL). In the process of reviewing the available documentation, I note that ipfw(8) has: | ... | The following case-insensitive parameters can be configured for a | scheduler: |=20 | type {fifo | wf2q+ | rr | qfq} | specifies the scheduling algorithm to use. | .... On the other hand, `cd /usr/src/sys/netpfil/ipfw; ls dn_{aqm,sched}*.c` shows: dn_aqm_codel.c dn_sched_fq_codel.c dn_sched_qfq.c dn_aqm_pie.c dn_sched_fq_pie.c dn_sched_rr.c dn_sched_fifo.c dn_sched_prio.c dn_sched_wf2q.c (This reflects head @r326875 and stable/11 @r326848.) So it seems that the list of scheduling algorithms in ipfw(8) is a bit more restricted than the code supports. Is this observation correct? If so, is it intentional? Thanks! I've set Reply-To. Peace, david --=20 David H. Wolfskill david@catwhisker.org The US "cannot afford" Trump as President or Roy Moore in the Senate. See http://www.catwhisker.org/~david/publickey.gpg for my public key. --KqgzcibYR01ijRX/ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQF8BAEBCgBmBQJaNDItXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRDQ0I3Q0VGOTE3QTgwMUY0MzA2NEQ3N0Ix NTM5Q0M0MEEwNDlFRTE3AAoJEBU5zECgSe4X7UcH/jDPBcpPgH959MbhrZOMSgfx ONLEYUzOM3yFbBIzW8iF2mqhT5xJMA7/S8FfcJbo1QrWMge22mmqQRrz9/vRHqBH 0jqX1MfZQv48r6i06KGTpWcE8XeMx0h7JdVpCVx2AmRTat4v86vRp/0Nqmos2HWH PtQHtqdruN80DaIY0/YwrTfB8scpxCUS50M9V6LgQQQq7NO8NbJz2mOEiTqeyw+O Xrrib1q2ArvEilVVpvtePTDqFJou+HRVs4w4EbAbL4Z95g5mUfZ82vzTnaVxkk5j 0vq7GGJ1o2SPpLm7nB1rwCm9s/f4vngkAmmcj23VBglYmBu7WhLlUbv0xoIW368= =WDiN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --KqgzcibYR01ijRX/-- From owner-freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Sat Dec 16 19:44:06 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 649ABE8C932 for ; Sat, 16 Dec 2017 19:44:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from garmitage@swin.edu.au) Received: from au-smtp-delivery-112.mimecast.com (au-smtp-delivery-112.mimecast.com [124.47.189.112]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.mimecast.com", Issuer "Symantec Class 3 Secure Server SHA256 SSL CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF44F7007B for ; Sat, 16 Dec 2017 19:44:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from garmitage@swin.edu.au) Received: from gpo4.cc.swin.edu.au (gpo4.cc.swin.edu.au [136.186.1.33]) (Using TLS) by au-smtp-1.mimecast.com with ESMTP id au-mta-16-dG1cuXXFP8CHFRdX22VuDw-1; Sun, 17 Dec 2017 06:42:32 +1100 Received: from [136.186.229.37] (garmitage.caia.swin.edu.au [136.186.229.37]) by gpo4.cc.swin.edu.au (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id vBGJgSdS009632 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 17 Dec 2017 06:42:28 +1100 Subject: Re: ipfw(8) and additional scheduling algorithm specifications To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org References: <20171215203557.GN1179@albert.catwhisker.org> Cc: david@catwhisker.org, Lawrence Stewart , Rasool Al-Saadi From: grenville armitage Message-ID: <5A357724.3020506@swin.edu.au> Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2017 06:42:28 +1100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171215203557.GN1179@albert.catwhisker.org> X-MC-Unique: dG1cuXXFP8CHFRdX22VuDw-1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.25 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2017 19:44:06 -0000 Hi David, The related documentation update did fall between the cracks, and is curre= ntly sitting in https://reviews.freebsd.org/D12507 cheers, gja On 12/16/2017 07:35, David Wolfskill wrote: > I've started looking into configuring ipfw & dummynet to see if > FQ-CoDel might improve things for my home Internet connection > (residential ADSL). > > In the process of reviewing the available documentation, I note that > ipfw(8) has: > > | ... > | The following case-insensitive parameters can be configured for a > | scheduler: > | > | type {fifo | wf2q+ | rr | qfq} > | specifies the scheduling algorithm to use. > | .... > > On the other hand, `cd /usr/src/sys/netpfil/ipfw; ls dn_{aqm,sched}*.c` > shows: > > dn_aqm_codel.c dn_sched_fq_codel.c dn_sched_qfq.c > dn_aqm_pie.c dn_sched_fq_pie.c dn_sched_rr.c > dn_sched_fifo.c dn_sched_prio.c dn_sched_wf2q.c > > > (This reflects head @r326875 and stable/11 @r326848.) > > So it seems that the list of scheduling algorithms in ipfw(8) is a bit > more restricted than the code supports. > > Is this observation correct? If so, is it intentional? > > Thanks! > > I've set Reply-To. > > Peace, > david > --=20 > David H. Wolfskill david@catwhisker.org > The US "cannot afford" Trump as President or Roy Moore in the Senate. > > See http://www.catwhisker.org/~david/publickey.gpg for my public key. --=20 Professor Grenville Armitage School of Software and Electrical Engineering Faculty of Science, Engineering and Technology Swinburne University of Technology, Australia http://i4t.swin.edu.au/people/garmitage