Hi all, Re: setting the forwarding-class of a packet through a firewall filter.
Many (almost all) of the examples I've looked at do not include a catch-all term to handle packets not matched by any explicitly-defined terms. At the risk of exposing myself as a J-noob... Is it safe to assume that, if the desired result is that packets NOT matched by explicitly-defined terms are permitted, a catch-all term must be configured with an 'accept' (or some other non-terminating) action? Using this input filter example: (stolen from http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos10.2/topics/usage-guidelines/policy-configuring-actions-in-firewall-filter-terms.html) firewall { filter filter1 { term 1 { from { dscp 2; } then { dscp 0; forwarding-class best-effort; } } term 2 { from { dscp 3; } then { forwarding-class best-effort; } } } } I read this as: - if the packet is marked DSCP 2, set DSCP to 0 and place in 'best-effort' forwarding class and accept the packet. - if the packet is marked DSCP 3, place in 'best-effort' forwarding class and accept the packet. - discard all other packets Am I missing something? I think what I really want, to avoid dropping traffic, is something like: firewall { filter FILTER1 { term TERM1 { from { dscp ef; } then forwarding-class expedited-forwarding; } term DEFAULT { then forwarding-class best-effort; accept; } } } ...then rewrite DSCP bits on egress based on the forwarding-class, or do it all within the firewall filter (depending on platform). (I know I don't strictly need the 'accept;' command in the DEFAULT term, but for the sake of clarity, I think it's a good option) Cheers, Dale _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
