netdev - Re: ingress policying for realtime protocol

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:	Wed, 20 May 2015 18:53:00 -0700
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Cong Wang <cwang@...pensource.com>
Cc:	Uwe Kleine-König 
	<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Subject: Re: ingress policying for realtime protocol

On Wed, 2015-05-20 at 18:47 -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2015-05-20 at 16:46 -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> >
> >> There is very little to do on ingress side since there is no queue at all,
> >> not to mention priority, you could try ifb to see if it fits your need.
> >
> > Note that if the need is to police traffic, ifb is not really needed :
> >
> 
> You really need to read Uwe's email before reply,
> he mentioned prio qdisc:
> 
> "I wonder
> what's missing to get ingress policying more versatile to allow for
> example a prio qdisc or if there is some conceptual problem that I don't
> see."


I did. He used the very precise word of policing, not shaping.

The fact there is a error in "policying" does not allow you to fix this
to "shaping".

It seems very clear to me that Uwe use case does not require ifb at all.

Listen Cong, could you please stop assuming that I am a jerk ?

Thanks !


--
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