From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 8 16:45:02 2009 Return-Path: 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 1F9F61065670 for ; Thu, 8 Oct 2009 16:45:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from outQ.internet-mail-service.net (outq.internet-mail-service.net [216.240.47.240]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 019878FC19 for ; Thu, 8 Oct 2009 16:45:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from idiom.com (mx0.idiom.com [216.240.32.160]) by out.internet-mail-service.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82FB2D61EE; Thu, 8 Oct 2009 09:45:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e Received: from julian-mac.elischer.org (home.elischer.org [216.240.48.38]) by idiom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACA942D62FD; Thu, 8 Oct 2009 09:18:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4ACE10CF.2030806@elischer.org> Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 09:18:23 -0700 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Macintosh/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Oleg Bulyzhin 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> <4ACCC4F3.3030302@mail.ru> <20091008060608.GA23793@lath.rinet.ru> In-Reply-To: <20091008060608.GA23793@lath.rinet.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: rihad , freebsd-net@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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 16:45:02 -0000 Oleg Bulyzhin wrote: > On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 09:42:27PM +0500, rihad wrote: >> 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. > > tee & ngtee are similar with one_pass=0 and different with one_pass=1 that seems like a bug to me.. neither tee should ever terminate a search. if you want to terminate it, add a specific rule to do so. Unfortunately I wasn't involved in writing it.