Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 12:23:36 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy <peter.jeremy@alcatel-lucent.com> To: Ermal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Lu=E7i?= <eri@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-pf@freebsd.org" <freebsd-pf@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] PF+dummynet Message-ID: <20110822022336.GL6142@pjdesk.au.alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <CAPBZQG2KZww5MfX6HB=YMX0MrtTPrQwinxok-nLjnLNTN33O=w@mail.gmail.com> References: <200710171043.08126.max@love2party.net> <d5992baf0710171324n65c4b171l71db8aeac445b52d@mail.gmail.com> <9a542da30710211232v4d3c930fg8ea778a12f3f16cb@mail.gmail.com> <9a542da30710280617t11e668e2o4d122998192f71c@mail.gmail.com> <20081103060321.GA45414@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <9a542da30811040753m1a2728bcu365c65da8fb61721@mail.gmail.com> <20110629044233.GB65891@pjdesk.au.alcatel-lucent.com> <BANLkTimyfZ=-UCxLAE_XX7BH3a0YLHdFKQ@mail.gmail.com> <20110713010029.GE65891@pjdesk.au.alcatel-lucent.com> <CAPBZQG2KZww5MfX6HB=YMX0MrtTPrQwinxok-nLjnLNTN33O=w@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--C94crkcyjafcjHxo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable [This is fairly old but has recently bubbled to the top of my TODO list] On 2011-Jul-13 23:35:44 +0800, Ermal Lu=E7i <eri@freebsd.org> wrote: >I reverted back from having the pipes configured in pfctl because it >will be a catching game with ipfw. >To me it seems quite awkward that you cannot use ipfw to do all the >configuration and >just use the pipe/queue numbers for sending traffic to it on pfctl. Whereas, to me it seems awkward that you use pfctl to attach dummynet flows to pf rules but you can't use pfctl to manage the dmmmynet configuration. I have managed to integrate ipfw/dummynet.c into pfctl and it all seems to work for me - except that flows are not persistent so that my statistics doesn't work. I am still working through to see if this is something I broke or a new "feature". I hope to forward patches once I'm happy with it. >To me something that is glued on ipfw should stay there as it will get >the best support. >Possibly splitting dummynet configuration out to dnctl might have an argum= ent. IMHO, it would be a great improvement to separate dummynet from ipfw. --=20 Peter Jeremy --C94crkcyjafcjHxo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk5RvagACgkQ/opHv/APuIc3GwCgwDS7CRao/YXjtg9zZuYUAF6O DXgAoJzwheIJhY5g630tg1Ed1jrPiZGY =qGwM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --C94crkcyjafcjHxo--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110822022336.GL6142>