netdev - Re: Network QoS support in applications

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 26 Jan 2010 12:30:28 +0100
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Kalle Valo <kalle.valo@....fi>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Network QoS support in applications

Kalle Valo wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I have been trying to understand how applications should use network
> QoS. My interest have been mostly from wireless perspective,
> especially how to utilise WMM and U-APSD properly, but naturally this
> applicable to all networks.
> 
> I have done some research about this, but I haven't managed to get
> anywhere. For example, from my point of view DiffServ is just one big
> mess and I can't see how in practise it can help applications.
> 
> I wrote a small wiki page to sum up my findings:
> 
> http://wireless.kernel.org/en/developers/Documentation/qos
> 
> I would like to clear up all this by and I'm willing to write a
> document for application developers about network QoS. But I need help
> to understand what's the proper way to mark different QoS
> prioritities.
> 
> In the wiki page I have tried to come up with different possible
> solutions (copied below), but I'm sure there are even more ways.
> 
> Please comment. I would like to get some understanding about this.
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Solution 1: SO_PRIORITY with values 0-7
> 
> Easy, applications need to just use setsockopt() and be done with it.
> It's unknown how widely supported values 0-7 are and the exact meaning
> of them, but at least they make sense (0 default, 1 lowest priority
> and 7 highest priority). The problem is that the priority is used only
> in the first link, rest of the route is not able to benefit from the
> classification.
> 
> Pros:
> 
>     * easy for applications
>     * works with both IPv4 and IPv6 
> 
> Cons:
> 
>     * only visible in in the first L2 link, not visible to upper
>       layers (IP)
>     * no well defined meaning for the priority values 
> 
> Solution 2: SO_PRIORITY with values 256-263

You can actually encode any class handle in SO_PRIORITY, all classful
qdiscs support classification based on this.
--
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