[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1104190620070.14027@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 06:28:02 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@....pp.se>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
cc: Joe Buehler <aspam@....net>, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: DSCP values in TCP handshake
On Mon, 18 Apr 2011, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> Linux does not look at DSCP of incoming packets (there is no queue).
Then I see no reason for the policy of not reflecting DSCP.
If we receive the DSCP marked packet then it means the network is either
not QoS enabled (it doesn't care) or it's actually allowed through the
border router with DSCP unchanged. Either means it's safe to reflect the
DSCP value, either it will have no effect or it's actually meant to be
prioritized.
With precedence, it originally was mandated that if the precedence value
changed, the TCP session should be reset. Fortunately, this was changed
but I would still say that it's thought that DSCP values should be
reflected by the server.
For instance:
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ieprep-reflexive-dscp-02>
"The requester could initiate this. Thus, if the DSCP
received on one TCP segment differs from the TCP used on a prior TCP
segment in a session, the new DSCP SHOULD be reflected unless local
policy prevents this."
I don't know why this didn't make it into RFC, I can inquiry if there is
interest.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@....pp.se
--
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