From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <edwin+ml-cerowrt@etorok.net>
Received: from mx.etorok.net (mx.etorok.net [62.113.205.31])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client CN "mx.etorok.net",
	Issuer "StartCom Class 1 Primary Intermediate Server CA" (not
	verified))
	by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F2F921F29F
	for <cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>;
	Sat,  5 Apr 2014 14:25:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mx.etorok.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id c9f2f1a3;
	Sun, 6 Apr 2014 00:25:40 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=etorok.net; h=
	message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:references:in-reply-to
	:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=ml; l=863; bh=SVklJ7L
	NPrl8D1kC7tnbrRDSPGY=; b=Q4Ue9UULSujlSxUQW+7ramtRjBFfq9a2e+x+TyK
	o9VNt1slwbYpr+Prj+mb3phjwMUxr9ZjZL3GFQGVADe8CMdLbYoWD9R4JbaGVZ5P
	IQTqddEOVj51n1T8jI1CMeVdsatgc/qftpzu3Kh6BrPpQxq1FIkz28Fl2CpShjX6
	HrKY=
Received: by mx.etorok.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 022bc705;
	TLS version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO; 
	Sun, 6 Apr 2014 00:25:40 +0300 (EEST)
Message-ID: <534074D3.4050608@etorok.net>
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2014 00:25:39 +0300
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?T=F6r=F6k_Edwin?= <edwin+ml-cerowrt@etorok.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
References: <CAA93jw6etj1w-OAv-Npv6hvLSXgcE+-CuNcNkFXaY9p8Ht352A@mail.gmail.com>	<533FC007.3010700@etorok.net>
	<CAA93jw7r4Ru6KXJnVm7XO+dWHyS7o--8bY+okGSw+rGwEGv5ew@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw7r4Ru6KXJnVm7XO+dWHyS7o--8bY+okGSw+rGwEGv5ew@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" <cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] cerowrt-3.10.34-4 dev build released
X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project
	<cerowrt-devel.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/cerowrt-devel>,
	<mailto:cerowrt-devel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:cerowrt-devel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel>,
	<mailto:cerowrt-devel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2014 21:25:45 -0000

On 04/05/2014 06:53 PM, Dave Taht wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 1:34 AM, Török Edwin <edwin+ml-cerowrt@etorok.net> wrote:
>> I hacked the script to set the interface name for iptables to pppoe-ge00 (not for uci, cause uci
>> doesn't have an enabled=1 for pppoe):
>>                 setup_ipset
>> +               interface=pppoe-ge00
>>                 setup_iptables "$interface"
>>
>> Any idea how to fix this properly without hardcoding the interface name?
> 
> I_have_no_spacebar_this_morning_(too_damp).
> 
> One_thought_had_been_to_hook_it_into_the_wan_firewall_chains.
> 
> another_would_be_to_more_deeply_inspect_the_interface_definition
> and_"do_the_right_thing"_against_various_protos.
> 

Does this affect sqm-scripts too?
It only sets QoS classification on ge00, not pppoe-ge00. By the time the packets reach ge00, do they still have the QoS bits set?

Best regards,
--Edwin