Re: Traffic quota features in IPFW
From: Max Laier (max_at_love2party.net)
Date: 07/16/05
- Previous message: Chris Dionissopoulos: "Traffic quota features in IPFW"
- In reply to: Chris Dionissopoulos: "Traffic quota features in IPFW"
- Next in thread: Chris Dionissopoulos: "Re: Traffic quota features in IPFW"
- Reply: Chris Dionissopoulos: "Re: Traffic quota features in IPFW"
- Reply: Luigi Rizzo: "Re: Traffic quota features in IPFW"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org, Chris Dionissopoulos <dionch@freemail.gr> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 17:40:32 +0200
On Saturday 16 July 2005 17:02, Chris Dionissopoulos wrote:
> Hi ppl, ( and sorry for cross posting)
>
> I review Andrey's Elsukov patch for adding "bound" support in ipfw, and i
> decide to push a little forward this feature.
Sorry to be blunt, but I don't see the point in this feature nor do I think
it's a good idea. All it does is adding overhead to every packet that is
processed by IPFW. You might argue that this overhead is fairly little, but
if you combine the last ten "neat to have though not really necessary"
features this adds up. Also the code is getting more and more hacked up.
Your feature might be nicely done, but it adds to the main switch-loops
making them more and more unreadable until it all falls over and nobody is
willing to touch the code anymore. I have seen (too) much ipfw code lately
while tieing together lose ends in the IPv6-import and it's already messy
enough.
I urge you to reconsider if we really need this. If you think we can't live
without it, it'd be nice if you could come up with a clean(er) way to extend
IPFW with additional stuff like this without impact to performance and
maintainability for the common case (without the magic foobar-option of the
day). Thanks.
BTW: This function can be done with a three line awk-skript without any effect
on performance. Of course you will lose some precision, but I don't see
applications where you have to be *that* percise.
> You can see the whole picture in there:
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=80642
> and there:
> http://butcher.heavennet.ru/
>
> In my patch, 3 new options are added:
> 1. "below <VALUE>" (which is the same option as Andrey's "bound" option, I
> just rename it) 2. "above <VALUE>" which is the oposite option of "below".
> Match rules when the counter is above <value> 3. "check-quota" (which is
> the same option as Andrey's "check-bound" , but now applies to both "above"
> and "below" options).
>
> Notes:
> 1. Patch is against releng_6.
> 2. I also include a more compicated example which is (IMHO) a complete
> traffic quota+shaping solution for a small (or not so small) ISP.
> 3. For installation, follow the instructions Adrey publish in his webspace:
> http://butcher.heavennet.ru/
> 4. Patch doesn't breaks ipfw ABI (today) , because adds new options at the
> end of list. If you apply this patch in a month or so, I cannot guarantee
> success.
> 5. Please test, and send me your feedbacks.
>
>
> I 'll be happy if you find usefull these features and if any developer
> commits this patch in current or releng_6 branch.
-- /"\ Best regards, | mlaier@freebsd.org \ / Max Laier | ICQ #67774661 X http://pf4freebsd.love2party.net/ | mlaier@EFnet / \ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | Against HTML Mail and News
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
- Previous message: Chris Dionissopoulos: "Traffic quota features in IPFW"
- In reply to: Chris Dionissopoulos: "Traffic quota features in IPFW"
- Next in thread: Chris Dionissopoulos: "Re: Traffic quota features in IPFW"
- Reply: Chris Dionissopoulos: "Re: Traffic quota features in IPFW"
- Reply: Luigi Rizzo: "Re: Traffic quota features in IPFW"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
