> > So, is the best way of implementing this to do the same as transparent > > proxying, and check whether the (proposed) marking option is enabled in > > squid.conf when executing restoreCapabilities? If the user has asked for > > packets to be marked, then CAP_NET_ADMIN will be retained. The mark > > would then be applied in comm.cc in a similar way to the TOS settings. > > > > Andy > > Cool. > So, do you have a clear use-case we can add to the wiki and commit > message?
I'll send one through shortly (or should I add it myself?). Should it be the same as the items in the Features list? > What do you think, for the config UI: > qos_flows - adding an initial flag "tos"|"mark" which determines which > marking type is to be set. Followed by the current (or extended) > stream=value tags. Default to "tos" if missing for backward compatibility > So we end up with: > qos_flows tos parent-hit=0xA sibling-hit=0xB > qos_flows mark local-miss=0x1 I was thinking of a separate config option, but you're right, it makes sense to put this in the same option. > The current src/ip/QosConfig.h fields may become a sub-struct of fields > if there is a double-up in wanting to label a stream with both TOS and > mark. I can't see much requirement to do both, but I guess for completeness, as it's technically possible it should be implemented. I'd also like to implement a preserve-miss feature. However, in my initial testing I was unable to retrieve the mark on the packet received by Squid. Andy
