[PATCH] PF+dummynet

2007-10-28 Thread Ermal Luçi
Attached is the patch against -CURRENT for integrating PF with dummynet!

It gives full dummynet support in pf.conf syntax and removes dummynet
depndency to ipfw.

You can configure a pipe/queue using the same ipfw syntax the only
difference is that i call those 'dnpipe'/'dnqueue' respectivley.
GRED/RED isn't currently finished but that is a pfctl addition so not
difficult.

For dummynet i preserve ipfw style statistics so tools of ipfw can be
used here to.

Since this is PF i preserved ALTQ priotitizing of ACK, meaning on ALTQ you do
pass in quick proto tcp from any to any flags S/SA queue(pri, que)

You can do the same with dummynet queues only, since for pipes it
doesn't make much sense since they simulate a link. So yuo can do

dnpipe 10 bandwidth 100Kbit
dnqueue 10 dnpipe 10 queue 100
dnqueue 20 dnpipe 10 queue 20

pass in quick proto tcp from any to any flags S/SA dnqueue(10, 20)


Please test and give feedback.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

MPLS implementatrion!

2007-10-28 Thread Ermal Luçi
I was wondering why this implementation of MPLS isn't integrated into FreeBSD?!
http://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~iannone/Files/MPLS-Complete.zip
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: MPLS implementatrion!

2007-10-28 Thread Bruce M. Simpson

Ermal Luçi wrote:

I was wondering why this implementation of MPLS isn't integrated into FreeBSD?!
http://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~iannone/Files/MPLS-Complete.zip
  


At least two reasons spring to mind:
1. It seems to be targeted at FreeBSD 4.2, which is very old indeed.
2. No mention of it in GNATS or the mailing list that I can see or recall.
3. I'd certainly never heard of it until now, and I've been keeping my 
eyes peeled for these things.


Also the work doesn't seem to be complete: I'm really not sure that the 
ability to open an MPLS socket is useful in anything other than an 
experimental context.


MPLS is not a protocol which is designed with end-stations in mind -- 
it's for routers -- and like any form of traffic engineering, it depends 
on a packet filtering engine at the ingress point. pf could offer such a 
filtering engine.


Whilst it's very cool that someone appeared to have done some of the 
work...  Matthew Luckie came forward a few months back and volunteered 
to work on porting Ayame to modern FreeBSDs.


It is more likely a better fit for FreeBSD and other projects which can 
build on it, so I think it is best we hold off for now.


regards,
BMS

___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: MPLS implementatrion!

2007-10-28 Thread Julian Elischer

Bruce M. Simpson wrote:

Ermal Luçi wrote:
I was wondering why this implementation of MPLS isn't integrated into 
FreeBSD?!

http://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~iannone/Files/MPLS-Complete.zip
  


there's a hell of a lot of these sorts of things out there 
that no-one has heard of




At least two reasons spring to mind:
1. It seems to be targeted at FreeBSD 4.2, which is very old indeed.
2. No mention of it in GNATS or the mailing list that I can see or recall.
3. I'd certainly never heard of it until now, and I've been keeping my 
eyes peeled for these things.


Also the work doesn't seem to be complete: I'm really not sure that the 
ability to open an MPLS socket is useful in anything other than an 
experimental context.


MPLS is not a protocol which is designed with end-stations in mind -- 
it's for routers -- and like any form of traffic engineering, it depends 
on a packet filtering engine at the ingress point. pf could offer such a 
filtering engine.


Whilst it's very cool that someone appeared to have done some of the 
work...  Matthew Luckie came forward a few months back and volunteered 
to work on porting Ayame to modern FreeBSDs.


It is more likely a better fit for FreeBSD and other projects which can 
build on it, so I think it is best we hold off for now.


regards,
BMS

___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"