Trying to set some (not all) tos values, whether present in rt_dsfield or not, I get stopped:
#ip rule add tos 0x20 table mytable
RTNETLINK answers: Invalid argument
Some values work, such as 0x10, 0x08, and oddly, 0x2 (but not 0x20, although rt_dsfield resolves to the same alias).
Bug? Feature? What am I missing here?
TIA
Please you CODE tags around those parts of your posts that are computer terminal sessions: http://forums.opensuse.org/english/information-new-users/advanced-how-faq-read-only/451526-posting-code-tags-guide.html
I didn’t think that manually typing TWO lines of terminal commands constituted code. Apologies.
BTW, this forum software is atrocious.
–
Lewis
[links removed from signature per silly forum requirements]
No. (But we have seen unreadable posts of only that short a length). It is for your future posts. And it is also because the feature is hidden in the Forums software (something we can not change) and we want to bring it to the attention of all new users.
On 07/06/12 10:26 pm, Rachelsdad thus wrote :
>
> Trying to set some (not all) tos values, whether present in rt_dsfield
> or not, I get stopped:
>
> #ip rule add tos 0x20 table mytable
> RTNETLINK answers: Invalid argument
>
> Some values work, such as 0x10, 0x08, and oddly, 0x2 (but not 0x20,
> although rt_dsfield resolves to the same alias).
>
> Bug? Feature? What am I missing here?
>
I may have made some progress on this front. there is a definite
difference between the older TOS and the newer DSCP, even though they
share the same field in the header.
It appears that I can set the four TOS values:
0x10
0x08
0x04
0x02
However, I can’t set other values which should be legitimate for DSCP.
The kernel appears to have the necessary modules for this, so I’m not
sure from where the invalid argument may be originating.
Thoughts?
On Sun, 08 Jul 2012 18:57:32 +0000, Lewis G Rosenthal wrote:
> Thoughts?
I’ve been looking at this myself over the past little bit, and it appears
that the iproute2 package’s implementation of ip may have changed to only
use 4 bits for the tos field rather than 8 bits.
Probably the best thing to do is report it as a bug and see what comes
back from the developers.
Jim
–
Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Administrator
Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C
On 07/08/12 03:35 pm, Jim Henderson thus wrote :
> On Sun, 08 Jul 2012 18:57:32 +0000, Lewis G Rosenthal wrote:
>
>> Thoughts?
>
> I’ve been looking at this myself over the past little bit, and it appears
> that the iproute2 package’s implementation of ip may have changed to only
> use 4 bits for the tos field rather than 8 bits.
>
> Probably the best thing to do is report it as a bug and see what comes
> back from the developers.
>
> Jim
>
Thanks, Jim. I’ll try against another distro, just to see, and I’ve also
posted to the LARC list about this. Very frustrating.
Cheers
On Sun, 08 Jul 2012 19:54:28 +0000, Lewis G Rosenthal wrote:
> Thanks, Jim. I’ll try against another distro, just to see, and I’ve also
> posted to the LARC list about this. Very frustrating.
No problem - I did a little digging around on Google, and found that the
Gentoo Russian forums had a post about this as well, seems they also have
seen this as well over there.
I spent a little time digging through the code, but the error message
that you’re getting isn’t explicitly given by ip itself - it’s just a
perror return when listing the rules (it seems).
But what’s really unusual is that the attempt doesn’t seem to actually be
logged anywhere - if we could find a log that showed what was happening,
that might give more insight.
Jim
–
Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Administrator
Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C
On 07/08/12 04:08 pm, Jim Henderson thus wrote :
> On Sun, 08 Jul 2012 19:54:28 +0000, Lewis G Rosenthal wrote:
>
>> Thanks, Jim. I’ll try against another distro, just to see, and I’ve also
>> posted to the LARC list about this. Very frustrating.
>
> No problem - I did a little digging around on Google, and found that the
> Gentoo Russian forums had a post about this as well, seems they also have
> seen this as well over there.
>
> I spent a little time digging through the code, but the error message
> that you’re getting isn’t explicitly given by ip itself - it’s just a
> perror return when listing the rules (it seems).
>
> But what’s really unusual is that the attempt doesn’t seem to actually be
> logged anywhere - if we could find a log that showed what was happening,
> that might give more insight.
>
I agree (and find it odd, as well, that there’s apparently no record of
the transaction attempt anywhere). I’m running a virtual Ubuntu 12
install (my first) on my local machine just for comparison. I wonder
whether there is an older working build of iproute2 available for
openSuSE 12.1 which may behave differently.
Much appreciate the extra poking around you’ve done. Have a good one,
and I’ll post back with my findings under this other distro (as well as
which version of iproute2 it uses).
BTW you can use rachelsdad@no-mx.forums.opensuse.org in your email address when using NNTP so that your forum avatar is there when posting from NNTP.
On 07/09/12 09:26 pm, glistwan thus wrote :
>
> Rachelsdad;2473188 Wrote:
>> I didn’t think that manually typing TWO lines of terminal commands
>> constituted code. Apologies.
>>
>> BTW, this forum software is atrocious.
>>
>> –
>> Lewis
>>
>> [links removed from signature per silly forum requirements]
> BTW you can use rachelsdad@no-mx.forums.opensuse.org in your email
> address when using NNTP so that your forum avatar is there when posting
> from NNTP.
>
Hey, thanks, Greg! Great tip.
Cheers
On 07/08/12 04:08 pm, Jim Henderson thus wrote :
> On Sun, 08 Jul 2012 19:54:28 +0000, Lewis G Rosenthal wrote:
>
>> Thanks, Jim. I’ll try against another distro, just to see, and I’ve also
>> posted to the LARC list about this. Very frustrating.
>
> No problem - I did a little digging around on Google, and found that the
> Gentoo Russian forums had a post about this as well, seems they also have
> seen this as well over there.
>
> I spent a little time digging through the code, but the error message
> that you’re getting isn’t explicitly given by ip itself - it’s just a
> perror return when listing the rules (it seems).
>
> But what’s really unusual is that the attempt doesn’t seem to actually be
> logged anywhere - if we could find a log that showed what was happening,
> that might give more insight.
>
Jim, what version of iproute2 are you using? I’ve rolled back from
2.6.39-3.5.1 to 2.6.39.3.2.2, and forward to 3.4.0-53.3 (no changes to
the kernel, however; still running 3.1.10-1.16) and I continue to see
this. Where is the appropriate place to report what appears to be a bug?
The openSUSE bug tracker or somewhere else for iproute2?
TIA
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 20:44:04 +0000, Lewis G Rosenthal wrote:
> Jim, what version of iproute2 are you using? I’ve rolled back from
> 2.6.39-3.5.1 to 2.6.39.3.2.2, and forward to 3.4.0-53.3 (no changes to
> the kernel, however; still running 3.1.10-1.16) and I continue to see
> this. Where is the appropriate place to report what appears to be a bug?
> The openSUSE bug tracker or somewhere else for iproute2?
The version I’ve got installed on my system here is 2.6.39.3.5.1 - latest
for 12.1 with current updates.
I’d report it to bugzilla.novell.com (which is where openSUSE bugs go) -
if it needs to go upstream, someone will either do that or will ask you
to do so.
Jim
–
Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Administrator
Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C
On 07/10/12 11:44 pm, Jim Henderson thus wrote :
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 20:44:04 +0000, Lewis G Rosenthal wrote:
>
>> Jim, what version of iproute2 are you using? I’ve rolled back from
>> 2.6.39-3.5.1 to 2.6.39.3.2.2, and forward to 3.4.0-53.3 (no changes to
>> the kernel, however; still running 3.1.10-1.16) and I continue to see
>> this. Where is the appropriate place to report what appears to be a bug?
>> The openSUSE bug tracker or somewhere else for iproute2?
>
> The version I’ve got installed on my system here is 2.6.39.3.5.1 - latest
> for 12.1 with current updates.
>
> I’d report it to bugzilla.novell.com (which is where openSUSE bugs go) -
> if it needs to go upstream, someone will either do that or will ask you
> to do so.
>
Thanks. See Bug 770785, which also references this thread.
Cheers
On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 04:47:22 +0000, Lewis G Rosenthal wrote:
> On 07/10/12 11:44 pm, Jim Henderson thus wrote :
>> On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 20:44:04 +0000, Lewis G Rosenthal wrote:
>>
>>> Jim, what version of iproute2 are you using? I’ve rolled back from
>>> 2.6.39-3.5.1 to 2.6.39.3.2.2, and forward to 3.4.0-53.3 (no changes to
>>> the kernel, however; still running 3.1.10-1.16) and I continue to see
>>> this. Where is the appropriate place to report what appears to be a
>>> bug?
>>> The openSUSE bug tracker or somewhere else for iproute2?
>>
>> The version I’ve got installed on my system here is 2.6.39.3.5.1 -
>> latest for 12.1 with current updates.
>>
>> I’d report it to bugzilla.novell.com (which is where openSUSE bugs go)
>> - if it needs to go upstream, someone will either do that or will ask
>> you to do so.
>>
>>
> Thanks. See Bug 770785, which also references this thread.
Awesome, thanks. When I get a sec, I’ll add myself to the CC: list as
I’m curious about this as well. 
Jim
–
Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Administrator
Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C