From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: philipp_subx@redfish-solutions.com
Cc: hagen@jauu.net, alex@digriz.org.uk, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: setsockopt(IP_TOS) being privileged or distinct capability?
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 20:13:24 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100705.201324.214230349.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C329E15.2000601@redfish-solutions.com>
From: Philip Prindeville <philipp_subx@redfish-solutions.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 21:08:05 -0600
> Yes, most users have admin/privileged rights on their machines, but
> don't know enough to exploit that.
Even "stupid" users are a very slim, marginal, step away from making
use of it once they get shown with a HOWTO on some web site what is
possible with this if QoS is being abided by on their network.
Look, this discussion seems completely pointless. The behavior is
never changing, setting the TOS will always be non-privileged.
We cannot change the current behavior no matter what political or
other motivation we might have for doing so. It's been non-privileged
for more than 15 years, and we'd knowingly break applications with the
change.
And I don't even agree with the arguments being proposed for doing
this. Users can control their packets however they wish. The only
thing the ISP can do to prevent toying with the TOS bits is putting
logic into your little black box that hooks up to your cable/dsl line.
So this TOS being privileged proposal it's a "no go" from any angle as
far as I'm concerned.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-06 3:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-03 17:58 setsockopt(IP_TOS) being privileged or distinct capability? Philip Prindeville
2010-07-03 18:55 ` Alexander Clouter
2010-07-03 23:07 ` Philip Prindeville
2010-07-03 23:48 ` Alexander Clouter
2010-07-05 18:04 ` Philip Prindeville
2010-07-06 2:07 ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2010-07-06 3:08 ` Philip Prindeville
2010-07-06 3:13 ` David Miller [this message]
2010-07-06 10:56 ` Benny Amorsen
2010-07-05 18:08 ` Philip Prindeville
2010-07-06 8:17 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
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=20100705.201324.214230349.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=alex@digriz.org.uk \
--cc=hagen@jauu.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=philipp_subx@redfish-solutions.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).