[Shorewall-users] [Fwd: Re: Shorewall 3.2.9 (Etch) 2 providers and traffic shaping]

2007-11-06 Thread Tom Eastep
Thanks, Jerry. Cristian -- there is certainly something inconsistent in the numbering of the providers between the working and non-working configurations. -Tom Original Message Subject: Re: [Shorewall-users] Shorewall 3.2.9 (Etch) 2 providers and traffic shaping Date: Tue, 06 N

Re: [Shorewall-users] [Fwd: Re: Shorewall 3.2.9 (Etch) 2 providers and traffic shaping]

2007-11-06 Thread Cristian Mammoli
Il giorno mar, 06/11/2007 alle 11.04 -0800, Tom Eastep ha scritto: > Thanks, Jerry. > > Cristian -- there is certainly something inconsistent in the numbering of > the providers between the working and non-working configurations. > Hi Tom, hi did some cleaning in the config files today, now the

Re: [Shorewall-users] [Fwd: Re: Shorewall 3.2.9 (Etch) 2 providers and traffic shaping]

2007-11-06 Thread Tom Eastep
Cristian Mammoli wrote: > > I used "traceproto $VARIOUS_INTERNET_HOSTS -p tcp -d 25" from the dmz > host and some requests went out through provider smrt1, some through > fweb1 Please try the attached patch. Thanks, -Tom -- Tom Eastep\ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool S

Re: [Shorewall-users] [Fwd: Re: Shorewall 3.2.9 (Etch) 2 providers and traffic shaping]

2007-11-06 Thread Cristian Mammoli
Il giorno mar, 06/11/2007 alle 13.55 -0800, Tom Eastep ha scritto: > How exactly did you test these two configurations and what did you see > that was different between the two? I ask because I don't see anything > happening in one that isn't also happening in the other. > > -Tom I put the "wor

Re: [Shorewall-users] [Fwd: Re: Shorewall 3.2.9 (Etch) 2 providers and traffic shaping]

2007-11-06 Thread Tom Eastep
Cristian Mammoli wrote: > Ok, I started all over with a clean 3.2.9 shorewall.conf and dumped the > two configurations. I also noticed that TC_EXPERT=Yes breaks the track > options with the working config, but it does NOT with the other > (HIGH_ROUTE_MARKS=Yes and shaping rules). > > I attached th

Re: [Shorewall-users] [Fwd: Re: Shorewall 3.2.9 (Etch) 2 providers and traffic shaping]

2007-11-06 Thread Cristian Mammoli
Ok, I started all over with a clean 3.2.9 shorewall.conf and dumped the two configurations. I also noticed that TC_EXPERT=Yes breaks the track options with the working config, but it does NOT with the other (HIGH_ROUTE_MARKS=Yes and shaping rules). I attached the two dumps, each done after a reboo

Re: [Shorewall-users] [Fwd: Re: Shorewall 3.2.9 (Etch) 2 providers and traffic shaping]

2007-11-06 Thread Tom Eastep
Tom Eastep wrote: > Cristian Mammoli wrote: > >> I used "traceproto $VARIOUS_INTERNET_HOSTS -p tcp -d 25" from the dmz >> host and some requests went out through provider smrt1, some through >> fweb1 > > Please try the attached patch. My belief is that the problem stems from the fact that the co

Re: [Shorewall-users] [Fwd: Re: Shorewall 3.2.9 (Etch) 2 providers and traffic shaping]

2007-11-06 Thread Cristian Mammoli
Config files shorewall.broken.tar.gz Description: application/compressed-tar shorewall.ok.tar.gz Description: application/compressed-tar - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to f

Re: [Shorewall-users] [Fwd: Re: Shorewall 3.2.9 (Etch) 2 providers and traffic shaping]

2007-11-06 Thread Prasanna Krishnamoorthy
On Nov 7, 2007 5:37 AM, Tom Eastep <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Example: > > 0x100 192.168.1.440.0.0.0/0 > 0x200 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp 25 > > A TCP packet from 192.168.1.44 with destination port 25 would end > up with a mark value of 0x300 whereas t

Re: [Shorewall-users] [Fwd: Re: Shorewall 3.2.9 (Etch) 2 providers and traffic shaping]

2007-11-06 Thread Tom Eastep
Prasanna Krishnamoorthy wrote: > On Nov 7, 2007 5:37 AM, Tom Eastep <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Example: >> >> 0x100 192.168.1.440.0.0.0/0 >> 0x200 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp 25 >> >> A TCP packet from 192.168.1.44 with destination port 25 would end >>

Re: [Shorewall-users] [Fwd: Re: Shorewall 3.2.9 (Etch) 2 providers and traffic shaping]

2007-11-06 Thread Prasanna Krishnamoorthy
On Nov 7, 2007 8:35 AM, Tom Eastep <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Prasanna Krishnamoorthy wrote: > > If I add a mark for traffic shaping in this case, prior to the above > > two rules, making them look like > > > > 0x11 192.168.1.44 0.0.0.0/0 > > 0x100 192.168.1.440.0.0.0/0 > > 0x200 0.0.0.

Re: [Shorewall-users] [Fwd: Re: Shorewall 3.2.9 (Etch) 2 providers and traffic shaping]

2007-11-07 Thread Cristian Mammoli
Il giorno mar, 06/11/2007 alle 14.25 -0800, Tom Eastep ha scritto: > Cristian Mammoli wrote: > > > > > I used "traceproto $VARIOUS_INTERNET_HOSTS -p tcp -d 25" from the dmz > > host and some requests went out through provider smrt1, some through > > fweb1 > > Please try the attached patch. > >