From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Oct  7 16:42:33 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B92E10656A5;
	Wed,  7 Oct 2009 16:42:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rihad@mail.ru)
Received: from mx75.mail.ru (mx75.mail.ru [94.100.176.90])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15B0F8FC17;
	Wed,  7 Oct 2009 16:42:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [217.25.27.27] (port=42561 helo=[217.25.27.27])
	by mx75.mail.ru with asmtp 
	id 1MvZax-0008MC-00; Wed, 07 Oct 2009 20:42:31 +0400
Message-ID: <4ACCC4F3.3030302@mail.ru>
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 21:42:27 +0500
From: rihad <rihad@mail.ru>
User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090706)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
References: <4AC8A76B.3050502@mail.ru>
	<20091007085902.GA88982@lath.rinet.ru>	<4ACC5E23.8090405@mail.ru>
	<20091007100503.GB88982@lath.rinet.ru>	<4ACC6A7B.5050808@mail.ru>
	<20091007104525.GC88982@lath.rinet.ru>
	<4ACC7308.6070301@mail.ru> <4ACCC30E.7080504@elischer.org>
In-Reply-To: <4ACCC30E.7080504@elischer.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam: Not detected
X-Mras: Ok
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Oleg Bulyzhin <oleg@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: dummynet dropping too many packets
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 16:42:33 -0000

Julian Elischer wrote:
> rihad wrote:
>> Oleg Bulyzhin wrote:
> 
>> You probably have some special sources of documentation ;-) According 
>> to man ipfw, both "netgraph/ngtee" and "pipe" decide the fate of the 
>> packet unless one_pass=0. Or do you mean sprinkling smart skiptos here 
>> and there? ;-)
>>
> 
> ngtee should not have any affect on the packet.. it takes a copy..
> 
That's a logical conclusion, although I prefer trusting the man at hand 
(pun intended) if I haven't tested it myself to see how it works:

      ngtee cookie
              A copy of packet is diverted into netgraph, original packet is
              either accepted or continues with the next rule, depending on
              net.inet.ip.fw.one_pass sysctl variable.  See ng_ipfw(4) 
for more
              information on netgraph and ngtee actions.


Although... I've a question to Mr. Oleg:

> 2) use 'tee' rule with ng_ksocket & ng_netflow

      tee port
              Send a copy of packets matching this rule to the divert(4) 
socket
              bound to port port.  The search continues with the next rule.

how is it different from one_pass=0? Both tee and ngtee w/ one_pass=0 
continue with the next rule.