Good time of day,
AES> 3.4's (and above) "tagging" is your friend :)
AES> if you need skeleton ruleset, this one...
[skipped]
hmm ... thanks for method (shaping on lo0, tagging), 'll see
how it works. But the question was
Why queueing filters & packet filters cannot
be configured separatelly ?
Shaping & filtering, theoretically, can have completely
different policy.
I.e. not "pass-n-shape" as on your ruleset, but "pass" &
"shape" in different rules/rulesets.
It is development question.
Before 3.3 ALTQ ruleset was completely separated, but inflexible. On
3.3+ ALTQ was merged into PF and pf.conf it become more more flexible
(BIG thanks to developers), but queue filters become hard-linked to
packet filter ruleset.
I think, there is a reasons to let queueing filters to can be
independed from packet filter rules, if need.
Maybe, it means hard work for developers, maybe it is inpossible
at all ('cause, for example, hard deep-low-level dependings), I don't,
really, know. It's just an opinion and feeling, that separated options
must to can be configured separatelly.
Regards,
Ilya A. Kovalenko (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
S.A.
JSC Oganer-Service
Special Equipment Software section
