From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 2 09:29:10 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9673437B401 for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 09:29:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.svzserv.kemerovo.su (mail.svzserv.kemerovo.su [213.184.65.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF0C643F85 for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 09:29:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.pp.ru) Received: from main.svzserv.kemerovo.su (root@hq.svzserv.kemerovo.su [213.184.65.65])h62GT5PZ057468 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2003 00:29:05 +0800 (NKZS) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.pp.ru) Received: from grosbein.pp.ru (D00015.dialonly.kemerovo.su [213.184.66.105]) h62GNrwQ044137 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2003 00:28:16 +0800 (NKZS) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.pp.ru) Received: from grosbein.pp.ru (smmsp@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grosbein.pp.ru (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h62GNl0i002217 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2003 00:23:47 +0800 (KRAST) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.pp.ru) Received: (from eugen@localhost) by grosbein.pp.ru (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h62GMlh4002180; Thu, 3 Jul 2003 00:22:47 +0800 (KRAST) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 00:22:47 +0800 From: Eugene Grosbein To: Michael Sierchio Message-ID: <20030703002247.A2097@grosbein.pp.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ipprecedence X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 16:29:10 -0000 > It seems to me you could use dummynet/ipfw2 to provide a > stronge PREFERENCE for packets w/non-zero precedence -- Well, I see now that FreeBSD has very simple and unmanaged interface queues, these are FIFO queues. So if I create dummynet queue and assign better weight to IP packets with ipprecedence, they probably come into interface's FIFOs first and will go out first. That's good, but that is not guaranteed. Then, if prioritized packed arrives when FIFO is not empty, it will not be allowed to go out before packets without ipprecedence that are already in FIFO. That's bad. Eugene P.S. Please CC: me as I'm not in the list.