From: David Acker <dacker@roinet.com>
To: Kalle Valo <kalle.valo@iki.fi>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, patrik.flykt@nokia.com
Subject: Re: WMM classification guideline for applications?
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 10:14:55 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B19276F.5080604@roinet.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87d42u6dnd.fsf@purkki.valot.fi>
Kalle Valo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> me and Patrik have been pondering what's the proper way for user space
> applications to do packet classification to get the benefits from WMM.
> VoIP application is a good example here.
>
> For the time being we have identified three different methods:
>
> 1. SO_PRIORITY with values 0-7 (we used this in nokia n810)
> 2. SO_PRIORITY with values 256-263 (used by mac80211)
> 3. IPv4 DSCP field with values 0-7 (used by mac80211)
>
> Method 1 is easy, applications need to just use setsockopt() and be
> done with it. I don't know how widely supported values 0-7 are, but at
> least they make sense. The problem is that priority is used only in
> the first link, rest of the route is not able to benefit from the
> classification.
>
> Method 2 (priorities 256-263) doesn't sound very portable. I doubt if
> any other stack or driver (even non-wifi ones) use these values.
> Otherwise this is similar with Method 1.
>
> Method 3 (IPv4 DSCP field) feels most portable to us, at least most,
> if not all, wifi drivers should use it. And, in theory, the receiver
> should also benefit from the classification, unless ISPs modify it of
> course. But the standardisation for IPv4 QoS bits is a mess and I
> don't really understand where the use of DSCP bits (as used in WMM
> implementations) is specified. Also I was told that root privileges
> are needed to set this and that's somewhat cumbersome from application
> developer's point of view.
What do think of also supporting a method 4, VLAN priority field (0-7)?
-ack
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-04 15:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-04 14:02 WMM classification guideline for applications? Kalle Valo
2009-12-04 15:14 ` David Acker [this message]
2009-12-04 15:24 ` Kalle Valo
2009-12-04 16:08 ` David Acker
2009-12-04 16:56 ` Greg Oliver
2009-12-04 19:15 ` Dan Williams
2009-12-04 20:01 ` David Acker
2009-12-07 15:11 ` Kalle Valo
2009-12-04 21:01 ` Kalle Valo
2009-12-06 10:46 ` Johannes Berg
2009-12-06 18:10 ` David Acker
2009-12-06 18:32 ` Johannes Berg
2009-12-07 1:34 ` David Acker
2009-12-06 10:57 ` Johannes Berg
2009-12-07 15:50 ` Kalle Valo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4B19276F.5080604@roinet.com \
--to=dacker@roinet.com \
--cc=kalle.valo@iki.fi \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=patrik.flykt@nokia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.