On Jun 7, 2012, at 8:24 PM, Philip Prindeville wrote:
> It might be nice to add a semantic that says, "when accepting connections,
> match their TOS"... possibly adding ranges of permitted TOS values.
... I would leave the matching to the application.
However, the suggested patch only supports UD
It might be nice to add a semantic that says, "when accepting connections,
match their TOS"... possibly adding ranges of permitted TOS values.
On 6/6/12 4:18 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> *nod* sure, I just want to be sure that it's clearly documented what
> the option does.
>
> If it just does UDP
On Jun 7, 2012, at 12:18 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> *nod* sure, I just want to be sure that it's clearly documented what
> the option does.
>
> If it just does UDP for now and not TCP, then so be it, as long as
> it's documented that way.
I think the suggested modification to the man page of IP,
On Jun 6, 2012, at 9:13 PM, Philip Prindeville wrote:
> On 6/6/12 11:54 AM, Michael Tuexen wrote:
>> On Jun 6, 2012, at 7:17 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> For TCP, I've seen the network layer change things (eg setting bits on
>>> incoming traffic to mark which interface it came in o
*nod* sure, I just want to be sure that it's clearly documented what
the option does.
If it just does UDP for now and not TCP, then so be it, as long as
it's documented that way.
Adrian
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org
On 6/6/12 11:54 AM, Michael Tuexen wrote:
> On Jun 6, 2012, at 7:17 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> For TCP, I've seen the network layer change things (eg setting bits on
>> incoming traffic to mark which interface it came in on), so you can't
>> guarantee the outbound ToS == inbound ToS.
>
On Jun 6, 2012, at 7:17 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For TCP, I've seen the network layer change things (eg setting bits on
> incoming traffic to mark which interface it came in on), so you can't
> guarantee the outbound ToS == inbound ToS.
I've not said that inbound == outbound... I just wa
Hi,
For TCP, I've seen the network layer change things (eg setting bits on
incoming traffic to mark which interface it came in on), so you can't
guarantee the outbound ToS == inbound ToS.
Adrian
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.fr
On Jun 6, 2012, at 10:15 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Well,
>
> * Is it usable on a TCP socket?
No. The main application (I see) is to access the ECN bits. In the TCP case,
ECN is handled in the kernel, so there is no need to deal with them in
userland.
On the other hand, TCP is byte stream oriented
Well,
* Is it usable on a TCP socket?
* Is it usable on an outbound TCP socket (ie, where the receive end
has set the ToS bits on the received ToS), regardless of what you've
set for the sending ToS?
* Does the receive TOS change during the lifetime of a TCP connection?
If so, can this fetch it?
*
On Jun 6, 2012, at 8:50 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 5 June 2012 15:11, Michael Tuexen wrote:
>
>> Why should it get lost? If there are no objections, I'll commit it. If there
>> are, we'll see if we can resolve it.
>
> Oh sweet, you can do that? Yes, I really would like to see this
> particula
On 5 June 2012 15:11, Michael Tuexen wrote:
> Why should it get lost? If there are no objections, I'll commit it. If there
> are, we'll see if we can resolve it.
Oh sweet, you can do that? Yes, I really would like to see this
particular feature in FreeBSD.
Thanks so much for coding it up!
Do y
On Jun 5, 2012, at 11:37 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Hi,
>
> can you please wrap this up in a PR so it's not lost?
Why should it get lost? If there are no objections, I'll commit it. If there
are, we'll see if we can resolve it.
Best regards
Michael
>
> thanks,
>
>
> Adrian
>
> On 5 June 2012
Hi,
can you please wrap this up in a PR so it's not lost?
thanks,
Adrian
On 5 June 2012 13:33, Michael Tuexen wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> there is currently no way to receive the TOS byte of a received UDP/IPv4
> packet.
> The attached patch adds a socket option (IP_RECVTOS) which you can use
> t
14 matches
Mail list logo
