netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Philip Prindeville <philipp_subx@redfish-solutions.com>
To: Benny Amorsen <benny+usenet@amorsen.dk>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	torsten.schmidt@s2006.tu-chemnitz.de, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv4: add DiffServ priority based routing
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 22:01:00 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D61FF9C.3080208@redfish-solutions.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m3tyslyej6.fsf@ursa.amorsen.dk>

On 3/12/10 3:18 AM, Benny Amorsen wrote:
> David Miller<davem@davemloft.net>  writes:
>
>> Look, this doesn't work.  QoS handling and policy belongs in the
>> egress point to the network, it's the only way to control this
>> properly and prevent abuse.
> First, QoS is important even within the network. Modern switches come
> pre-configured with sane defaults which ensure that e.g. EF marked
> packets get priority over non-EF-marked packets. Cisco, HP, and
> Linksys-Cisco at least provide a decent out-of-the-box configuration.
>
> This can obviously be abused, but the solution there is the same as in
> network abuses: Either apply the LART or change the configuration of the
> switches to be less trusting. We haven't, so far, had a customer where
> the LART was necessary, much less had to reconfigure a switch.
>
> So why not let Linux provide the same out-of-the-box experience as the
> switches do? If the trust is abused Linux provides lots of tools to make
> it less trusting or even to punish the abusers.
>
>
> /Benny

For those who want to use DiffServ as the out-of-the-box default configuration, and trust the marking on their traffic, I don't understand why certain folks are so adamant about not supporting this.

Torsten's patch to allow rt_tos2priority() to use IPTOS_PRECEDENCE() instead seemed reasonable.

Especially in a network using 802.1p or 802.1q encapsulation.



  reply	other threads:[~2011-02-21  6:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-01-12 13:32 [PATCH] ipv4: add DiffServ priority based routing Torsten Schmidt
2010-01-12 20:16 ` David Miller
2010-01-12 20:59   ` Philip A. Prindeville
2010-01-12 21:03     ` David Miller
2010-01-12 21:33       ` Philip A. Prindeville
2010-01-13  4:47         ` Steven Blake
2010-03-11 19:25       ` Philip A. Prindeville
2010-03-11 19:29         ` David Miller
2010-03-11 19:32           ` Philip A. Prindeville
2010-03-12 11:18           ` Benny Amorsen
2011-02-21  6:01             ` Philip Prindeville [this message]
2010-01-14 11:50   ` Torsten Schmidt
2010-01-14 12:50     ` Eric Dumazet
2010-01-15  0:51       ` David Miller
2010-01-15  8:24         ` Eric Dumazet
2010-01-15  8:26           ` David Miller

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=4D61FF9C.3080208@redfish-solutions.com \
    --to=philipp_subx@redfish-solutions.com \
    --cc=benny+usenet@amorsen.dk \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torsten.schmidt@s2006.tu-chemnitz.de \
    /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).