Re: [iproute2-next PATCH v3 2/2] man: tc-flower: Add explanation for range option
Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 05:59:45AM CET, dsah...@gmail.com wrote: >On 11/20/18 9:59 PM, Nambiar, Amritha wrote: >> Oops, submitted the v2 patch for man changes too soon, without seeing >> this. So, in this case, should I re-submit the iproute2-flower patch >> that was accepted removing the 'range' keyword? > >I think so. Consistency across commands is a good thing. +1
Re: [iproute2-next PATCH v3 2/2] man: tc-flower: Add explanation for range option
On 11/20/2018 8:59 PM, David Ahern wrote: > On 11/20/18 9:59 PM, Nambiar, Amritha wrote: >> Oops, submitted the v2 patch for man changes too soon, without seeing >> this. So, in this case, should I re-submit the iproute2-flower patch >> that was accepted removing the 'range' keyword? > > I think so. Consistency across commands is a good thing. > Okay, will do. I'll also combine the 'man patch' into 'flower patch' and make a single patch as Jiri recommended.
Re: [iproute2-next PATCH v3 2/2] man: tc-flower: Add explanation for range option
On 11/20/18 9:59 PM, Nambiar, Amritha wrote: > Oops, submitted the v2 patch for man changes too soon, without seeing > this. So, in this case, should I re-submit the iproute2-flower patch > that was accepted removing the 'range' keyword? I think so. Consistency across commands is a good thing.
Re: [iproute2-next PATCH v3 2/2] man: tc-flower: Add explanation for range option
On 11/20/2018 8:46 PM, David Ahern wrote:
> On 11/20/18 9:44 PM, Nambiar, Amritha wrote:
>> On 11/20/2018 2:56 PM, David Ahern wrote:
>>> On 11/15/18 5:55 PM, Amritha Nambiar wrote:
Add details explaining filtering based on port ranges.
Signed-off-by: Amritha Nambiar
---
man/man8/tc-flower.8 | 12 ++--
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/man/man8/tc-flower.8 b/man/man8/tc-flower.8
index 8be8882..768bfa1 100644
--- a/man/man8/tc-flower.8
+++ b/man/man8/tc-flower.8
@@ -56,8 +56,10 @@ flower \- flow based traffic control filter
.IR MASKED_IP_TTL " | { "
.BR dst_ip " | " src_ip " } "
.IR PREFIX " | { "
-.BR dst_port " | " src_port " } "
-.IR port_number " } | "
+.BR dst_port " | " src_port " } { "
+.IR port_number " | "
+.B range
+.IR min_port_number-max_port_number " } | "
.B tcp_flags
.IR MASKED_TCP_FLAGS " | "
.B type
@@ -227,6 +229,12 @@ Match on layer 4 protocol source or destination port
number. Only available for
.BR ip_proto " values " udp ", " tcp " and " sctp
which have to be specified in beforehand.
.TP
+.BI range " MIN_VALUE-MAX_VALUE"
+Match on a range of layer 4 protocol source or destination port number.
Only
+available for
+.BR ip_proto " values " udp ", " tcp " and " sctp
+which have to be specified in beforehand.
+.TP
.BI tcp_flags " MASKED_TCP_FLAGS"
Match on TCP flags represented as 12bit bitfield in in hexadecimal format.
A mask may be optionally provided to limit the bits which are matched. A
mask
>>>
>>> This prints as:
>>>
>>> dst_port NUMBER
>>> src_port NUMBER
>>> Match on layer 4 protocol source or destination port number.
>>> Only available for ip_proto values udp, tcp and sctp which have
>>> to be specified in beforehand.
>>>
>>> range MIN_VALUE-MAX_VALUE
>>> Match on a range of layer 4 protocol source or destination port
>>> number. Only available for ip_proto values udp, tcp and sctp
>>> which have to be specified in beforehand.
>>>
>>> ###
>>>
>>> That makes it look like range is a standalone option - independent of
>>> dst_port/src_port.
>>>
>>> It seems to me the dst_port / src_port should be updated to:
>>>
>>> dst_port {NUMBER | range MIN_VALUE-MAX_VALUE}
>>>
>>> with the description updated for both options and indented under
>>> dst_port / src_port
>>>
>>
>> Okay, will do.
>>
>
> Thinking about this perhaps the 'range' keyword can just be dropped. We
> do not use it in other places -- e.g., ip rule.
>
Oops, submitted the v2 patch for man changes too soon, without seeing
this. So, in this case, should I re-submit the iproute2-flower patch
that was accepted removing the 'range' keyword?
Re: [iproute2-next PATCH v3 2/2] man: tc-flower: Add explanation for range option
On 11/20/18 9:44 PM, Nambiar, Amritha wrote:
> On 11/20/2018 2:56 PM, David Ahern wrote:
>> On 11/15/18 5:55 PM, Amritha Nambiar wrote:
>>> Add details explaining filtering based on port ranges.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Amritha Nambiar
>>> ---
>>> man/man8/tc-flower.8 | 12 ++--
>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/man/man8/tc-flower.8 b/man/man8/tc-flower.8
>>> index 8be8882..768bfa1 100644
>>> --- a/man/man8/tc-flower.8
>>> +++ b/man/man8/tc-flower.8
>>> @@ -56,8 +56,10 @@ flower \- flow based traffic control filter
>>> .IR MASKED_IP_TTL " | { "
>>> .BR dst_ip " | " src_ip " } "
>>> .IR PREFIX " | { "
>>> -.BR dst_port " | " src_port " } "
>>> -.IR port_number " } | "
>>> +.BR dst_port " | " src_port " } { "
>>> +.IR port_number " | "
>>> +.B range
>>> +.IR min_port_number-max_port_number " } | "
>>> .B tcp_flags
>>> .IR MASKED_TCP_FLAGS " | "
>>> .B type
>>> @@ -227,6 +229,12 @@ Match on layer 4 protocol source or destination port
>>> number. Only available for
>>> .BR ip_proto " values " udp ", " tcp " and " sctp
>>> which have to be specified in beforehand.
>>> .TP
>>> +.BI range " MIN_VALUE-MAX_VALUE"
>>> +Match on a range of layer 4 protocol source or destination port number.
>>> Only
>>> +available for
>>> +.BR ip_proto " values " udp ", " tcp " and " sctp
>>> +which have to be specified in beforehand.
>>> +.TP
>>> .BI tcp_flags " MASKED_TCP_FLAGS"
>>> Match on TCP flags represented as 12bit bitfield in in hexadecimal format.
>>> A mask may be optionally provided to limit the bits which are matched. A
>>> mask
>>>
>>
>> This prints as:
>>
>> dst_port NUMBER
>> src_port NUMBER
>> Match on layer 4 protocol source or destination port number.
>> Only available for ip_proto values udp, tcp and sctp which have
>> to be specified in beforehand.
>>
>> range MIN_VALUE-MAX_VALUE
>> Match on a range of layer 4 protocol source or destination port
>> number. Only available for ip_proto values udp, tcp and sctp
>> which have to be specified in beforehand.
>>
>> ###
>>
>> That makes it look like range is a standalone option - independent of
>> dst_port/src_port.
>>
>> It seems to me the dst_port / src_port should be updated to:
>>
>> dst_port {NUMBER | range MIN_VALUE-MAX_VALUE}
>>
>> with the description updated for both options and indented under
>> dst_port / src_port
>>
>
> Okay, will do.
>
Thinking about this perhaps the 'range' keyword can just be dropped. We
do not use it in other places -- e.g., ip rule.
Re: [iproute2-next PATCH v3 2/2] man: tc-flower: Add explanation for range option
On 11/20/2018 2:56 PM, David Ahern wrote:
> On 11/15/18 5:55 PM, Amritha Nambiar wrote:
>> Add details explaining filtering based on port ranges.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Amritha Nambiar
>> ---
>> man/man8/tc-flower.8 | 12 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/man/man8/tc-flower.8 b/man/man8/tc-flower.8
>> index 8be8882..768bfa1 100644
>> --- a/man/man8/tc-flower.8
>> +++ b/man/man8/tc-flower.8
>> @@ -56,8 +56,10 @@ flower \- flow based traffic control filter
>> .IR MASKED_IP_TTL " | { "
>> .BR dst_ip " | " src_ip " } "
>> .IR PREFIX " | { "
>> -.BR dst_port " | " src_port " } "
>> -.IR port_number " } | "
>> +.BR dst_port " | " src_port " } { "
>> +.IR port_number " | "
>> +.B range
>> +.IR min_port_number-max_port_number " } | "
>> .B tcp_flags
>> .IR MASKED_TCP_FLAGS " | "
>> .B type
>> @@ -227,6 +229,12 @@ Match on layer 4 protocol source or destination port
>> number. Only available for
>> .BR ip_proto " values " udp ", " tcp " and " sctp
>> which have to be specified in beforehand.
>> .TP
>> +.BI range " MIN_VALUE-MAX_VALUE"
>> +Match on a range of layer 4 protocol source or destination port number. Only
>> +available for
>> +.BR ip_proto " values " udp ", " tcp " and " sctp
>> +which have to be specified in beforehand.
>> +.TP
>> .BI tcp_flags " MASKED_TCP_FLAGS"
>> Match on TCP flags represented as 12bit bitfield in in hexadecimal format.
>> A mask may be optionally provided to limit the bits which are matched. A
>> mask
>>
>
> This prints as:
>
> dst_port NUMBER
> src_port NUMBER
> Match on layer 4 protocol source or destination port number.
> Only available for ip_proto values udp, tcp and sctp which have
> to be specified in beforehand.
>
> range MIN_VALUE-MAX_VALUE
> Match on a range of layer 4 protocol source or destination port
> number. Only available for ip_proto values udp, tcp and sctp
> which have to be specified in beforehand.
>
> ###
>
> That makes it look like range is a standalone option - independent of
> dst_port/src_port.
>
> It seems to me the dst_port / src_port should be updated to:
>
> dst_port {NUMBER | range MIN_VALUE-MAX_VALUE}
>
> with the description updated for both options and indented under
> dst_port / src_port
>
Okay, will do.
- Amritha
Re: [iproute2-next PATCH v3 2/2] man: tc-flower: Add explanation for range option
On 11/15/18 5:55 PM, Amritha Nambiar wrote:
> Add details explaining filtering based on port ranges.
>
> Signed-off-by: Amritha Nambiar
> ---
> man/man8/tc-flower.8 | 12 ++--
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/man/man8/tc-flower.8 b/man/man8/tc-flower.8
> index 8be8882..768bfa1 100644
> --- a/man/man8/tc-flower.8
> +++ b/man/man8/tc-flower.8
> @@ -56,8 +56,10 @@ flower \- flow based traffic control filter
> .IR MASKED_IP_TTL " | { "
> .BR dst_ip " | " src_ip " } "
> .IR PREFIX " | { "
> -.BR dst_port " | " src_port " } "
> -.IR port_number " } | "
> +.BR dst_port " | " src_port " } { "
> +.IR port_number " | "
> +.B range
> +.IR min_port_number-max_port_number " } | "
> .B tcp_flags
> .IR MASKED_TCP_FLAGS " | "
> .B type
> @@ -227,6 +229,12 @@ Match on layer 4 protocol source or destination port
> number. Only available for
> .BR ip_proto " values " udp ", " tcp " and " sctp
> which have to be specified in beforehand.
> .TP
> +.BI range " MIN_VALUE-MAX_VALUE"
> +Match on a range of layer 4 protocol source or destination port number. Only
> +available for
> +.BR ip_proto " values " udp ", " tcp " and " sctp
> +which have to be specified in beforehand.
> +.TP
> .BI tcp_flags " MASKED_TCP_FLAGS"
> Match on TCP flags represented as 12bit bitfield in in hexadecimal format.
> A mask may be optionally provided to limit the bits which are matched. A mask
>
This prints as:
dst_port NUMBER
src_port NUMBER
Match on layer 4 protocol source or destination port number.
Only available for ip_proto values udp, tcp and sctp which have
to be specified in beforehand.
range MIN_VALUE-MAX_VALUE
Match on a range of layer 4 protocol source or destination port
number. Only available for ip_proto values udp, tcp and sctp
which have to be specified in beforehand.
###
That makes it look like range is a standalone option - independent of
dst_port/src_port.
It seems to me the dst_port / src_port should be updated to:
dst_port {NUMBER | range MIN_VALUE-MAX_VALUE}
with the description updated for both options and indented under
dst_port / src_port
