From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 21 06:42:37 2005 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 94D2316A4CE for ; Fri, 21 Jan 2005 06:42:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.ntmk.ru (mail.ntmk.ru [217.114.241.6]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B213F43D53 for ; Fri, 21 Jan 2005 06:42:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from boris@ntmk.ru) Received: from boris.nikom.ru ([10.1.16.195]) by mail.ntmk.ru with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CrsV6-0006NU-2V; Fri, 21 Jan 2005 11:42:32 +0500 Message-ID: <41F0A457.5010304@ntmk.ru> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 11:42:31 +0500 From: Boris Kovalenko User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041228) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brooks Davis , freebsd-net@freebsd.org References: <41EF9495.5080601@ntmk.ru> <20050120190516.GA12156@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <41F07622.5040102@ntmk.ru> <20050121054732.GA30766@odin.ac.hmc.edu> In-Reply-To: <20050121054732.GA30766@odin.ac.hmc.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PATCH] 802.1p priority (fixed) 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: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 06:42:37 -0000 Brooks Davis wrote: Hello! >>Yes, the outgoing packets are tagged with specified priority. Then next >>device (Cisco Catalyst for example) will assign traffic to different >>queues according to 802.1p header information. The only thing (IMHO) >>that may be coded for FreeBSD is to allow PF & IPFW assign packets to >>ALTQ or DUMMYNET according 802.1p information. > > OK, that makes sense. Hmm, do we actually want to be using seperate > interfaces for this? I'm sure it's very useful in some applications, > but if the real point is to get packets on the wire with the priority > tags, won't IPFW, PF, or maybe even the application be the best place > for this tagging rather then effectivly using the source address to set > it? Again, I'm not familiar with the way 802.1p is intended to work, so > this may be a dumb question. By the usual way, application does not have access to Layer 2 headers, so it can not set 802.1p priority itself. It may only set ToS value, but Layer 2 switches can not access Layer 3 information :) Indeed I'm not familar with BSD network structure interoperability. Andre Oppermann said that there is a way to mark this packets with m_tag from PF/IPFW. So, if this is really possible, the best way (IMHO) should be: if packet, that going out the vlan iterface has m_tag with 802.1p, we use this value, or value provided for vlan instead. This is just the way Cisco Catalyst does: trust the received 802.1p inforamtion, or override it. > > -- Brooks > -- With respect, Boris