On 09/12/2012 06:21 PM, Mr Dash Four wrote: >>> Only to make it be evaluated after value << 8 | 10 and to ensure >>> uniqueness between class priorities. >> "Be evaluated"? Are there any restrictions on these values? I know >> of one - in filters - that needs to be > 12. Are there any other >> such restrictions? > Further point on this - I did a bit of testing and changed my > discipline to htb just to see what has been produced. It turns out > that the value in the PRIORITY column in tcclasses is passed onto the > class definitions as-is - none of this << 8 | 20 malarkey! All my > class "prio" values are 1 to 7 - without exception (I could attach my > firewall_tc file produced, if needed - just let me know).
No need -- I'm prefectly aware of how it works. But as I pointed out in my previous post the 'malarkey' is used to order the filters, regardless of the queuing discipline. > > Also, I tried using the same priority values (1-7) when defining > filter classes as well. It turns out that not only is this value > accepted by tc, but it also works, so I don't know where you get that > the "prio" value in the "tc filter" statements must be > 12 from? I removed that restriction shortly after I posted the patch. -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ When I die, I want to go like my Grandfather who Shoreline, \ died peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming like Washington, USA \ all of the passengers in his car http://shorewall.net \________________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Shorewall-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-devel
