[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AD37372.8090401@redfish-solutions.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:20:34 -0700
From: "Philip A. Prindeville" <philipp_subx@...fish-solutions.com>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: netinet/ip.h and DSCP
Since linux-net doesn't seem to be the right forum...
On 10/02/2009 04:04 PM, Philip A. Prindeville wrote:
> Is there a reason that /usr/include/netinet/ip.h only contains
> definitions for ToS (precedence-based) markings?
>
> RFCs 2597/2598 have been out a *long* time... why is Linux so far behind
> the learning curve?
>
> We're discussing (at least here in the US) net neutrality... but if
> we're not marking our traffic the way we want it carried *anyway*, don't
> we deserve what we get if the carriers reshape our traffic by their own
> rules?
>
> Should there be definitions in netinet/ip.h like:
>
> #define IPTOS_DSCP_MASK 0xd0
> #define IPTOS_DSCP(x) ((x) & IPTOS_DSCP_MASK)
> #define IPTOS_DSCP_AF11 0x28
> #define IPTOS_DSCP_AF12 0x30
> #define IPTOS_DSCP_AF13 0x38
> #define IPTOS_DSCP_AF21 0x48
> #define IPTOS_DSCP_AF22 0x50
> #define IPTOS_DSCP_AF23 0x58
> #define IPTOS_DSCP_AF31 0x68
> #define IPTOS_DSCP_AF32 0x70
> #define IPTOS_DSCP_AF33 0x78
> #define IPTOS_DSCP_AF41 0x88
> #define IPTOS_DSCP_AF42 0x90
> #define IPTOS_DSCP_AF43 0x98
> #define IPTOS_DSCP_EF 0xb8
>
>
> Should be simple enough, right?
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Philip
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists