From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Philip A. Prindeville" Subject: Re: Still using IPTOS_TOS() in kernel? Really??? Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:45:32 -0800 Message-ID: <4B2A8A5C.9070702@redfish-solutions.com> References: <4B298118.2000608@redfish-solutions.com> <200912171724.32711.schmto@hrz.tu-chemnitz.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Torsten Schmidt Return-path: Received: from mail.redfish-solutions.com ([66.232.79.143]:54620 "EHLO mail.redfish-solutions.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965492AbZLQTpj (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:45:39 -0500 In-Reply-To: <200912171724.32711.schmto@hrz.tu-chemnitz.de> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 12/17/2009 08:24 AM, Torsten Schmidt wrote: > Hi Philip, > > interesting .. i am on the way to implement a DSCP/CS statistic to the kernel. > We need this for network traffic accounting. The concept is the following: > > We create a virtual file /pro/net/ipdscp , this includes several DSCP/CS > counters. See http://www.iana.org/assignments/dscp-registry/. Every time > ip_rcv_finish() is called, we take a look at the DSCP/CS (iph->tos) value and > increment the related counter. If you're interested in, i will send you a > patch ? .. That would be great. > Maybe this is a good starting point for an DSCP/CS implementation. I was also > shocked that the kernel do not really handle DiffServ thinks. I think it would also be useful to rework the existing definition of rt_tos2priority() to have a DSCP/CS version that people could then select and build in their kernel via a simple CONFIG_DIFFSERV_COMPLIANT flag. It could be selectable and default to off until a set cut-over point in the future, then it could become the default. RFC-2474 is now 11 years old... Odd that we're still not compliant. -Philip >> Assuming my crusade to get various common apps and services (wget, TB, FF, >> Sendmail, Cyrus, ProFTPd, etc) to use DSCP/CS marking (very few apps >> currently use DSCP or precedence marking), then kernels with the proper >> default behavior will need to start shipping, right? I.e. out-of-the-box >> kernels should handle such apps without further configuration, such as >> needing to have the DSCP iptables module installed. They should "just >> work". > Right. > > Best regards, > Torsten