Re: QOS/TOS in carp/freebsd in general

[Kristof Provost]

On 25 Apr 2018, at 15:53, Nick Wolff wrote:

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018, 6:55 PM Lee Brown  wrote:

setdscp cs7 from me to 224.0.0.18



You can do this in ipfw but not in pf as far as I'm aware.


You can do this in pf too.

 set-tos ⟨string⟩ | ⟨number⟩
   Enforces a TOS for matching IP packets.  TOS may be given as 
one of
   critical, inetcontrol, lowdelay, netcontrol, throughput, 
reliability,
   or one of the DiffServ Code Points: ef, af11 ... af43, cs0 
... cs7;

   or as either hex or decimal.

(Although right now only for IPv4. I’ll hopefully commit the v6 bits 
soon.)


Regards,
Kristof
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: QOS/TOS in carp/freebsd in general

[Nick Wolff]

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018, 6:55 PM Lee Brown  wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 1:27 AM, Tom Jones  wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:30:45PM -0400, Nick Wolff wrote:
> > >  Hi,
> > >
> > > I currently have a review in to make carp use dscp values on outgoing
> > > packets. This will make it easier to preform QOS on modern switches as
> we
> > > have been able to drive carp insane on 10g links while throwing storage
> > > traffic at it.On an interesting side note apparently after 64k mac
> > address
> > > moves for a single mac address in the cam table arista 7050t  seems to
> > with
> > > out warning give up and stop moving address but leaves it in the table
> > > where ever it last was.
> > >
> > > I was originally going to just toggle between cs7 and the old TOS low
> > delay
> > > setting. But it was requested that I just make it a settable Integer
> > value.
> > > In this case I'm planning to do 0-63 to match dscp with a default of 54
> > > (CS7) (Network Control) but you could still set the old value by
> setting
> > > the sysctl to 4. Anything larger then 64 would be truncated as two
> shifts
> > > are needed to align with the field leading.
> > >
> > > Does anybody do anything anywhere with the old TOS values like low
> delay
> > in
> > > there networking infrastructure? Should this be updated in other places
> > in
> > > kernel and userland? It's been 20 years since TOS was deprecated and
> > > replaced with DSCP.
> > >
> > > Any other comments or thought are always welcome.
> >
> > You can already do this with ipfw?
>
> setdscp cs7 from me to 224.0.0.18
> ___
> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
>

You can do this in ipfw but not in pf as far as I'm aware. While having the
ability in firewalls is great to me that is an administrative flexibility
tool. I think it's important that we have the right code paths to handle
this without workarounds. This is also a update of current code paths that
brings us up to date with 20 years ago and adds the functionality for IPv6
where it was never implemented.

>
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: QOS/TOS in carp/freebsd in general

[Lee Brown]

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 1:27 AM, Tom Jones  wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:30:45PM -0400, Nick Wolff wrote:
> >  Hi,
> >
> > I currently have a review in to make carp use dscp values on outgoing
> > packets. This will make it easier to preform QOS on modern switches as we
> > have been able to drive carp insane on 10g links while throwing storage
> > traffic at it.On an interesting side note apparently after 64k mac
> address
> > moves for a single mac address in the cam table arista 7050t  seems to
> with
> > out warning give up and stop moving address but leaves it in the table
> > where ever it last was.
> >
> > I was originally going to just toggle between cs7 and the old TOS low
> delay
> > setting. But it was requested that I just make it a settable Integer
> value.
> > In this case I'm planning to do 0-63 to match dscp with a default of 54
> > (CS7) (Network Control) but you could still set the old value by setting
> > the sysctl to 4. Anything larger then 64 would be truncated as two shifts
> > are needed to align with the field leading.
> >
> > Does anybody do anything anywhere with the old TOS values like low delay
> in
> > there networking infrastructure? Should this be updated in other places
> in
> > kernel and userland? It's been 20 years since TOS was deprecated and
> > replaced with DSCP.
> >
> > Any other comments or thought are always welcome.
>
> You can already do this with ipfw?

setdscp cs7 from me to 224.0.0.18
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: QOS/TOS in carp/freebsd in general

[Tom Jones]

On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:30:45PM -0400, Nick Wolff wrote:
>  Hi,
> 
> I currently have a review in to make carp use dscp values on outgoing
> packets. This will make it easier to preform QOS on modern switches as we
> have been able to drive carp insane on 10g links while throwing storage
> traffic at it.On an interesting side note apparently after 64k mac address
> moves for a single mac address in the cam table arista 7050t  seems to with
> out warning give up and stop moving address but leaves it in the table
> where ever it last was.
> 
> I was originally going to just toggle between cs7 and the old TOS low delay
> setting. But it was requested that I just make it a settable Integer value.
> In this case I'm planning to do 0-63 to match dscp with a default of 54
> (CS7) (Network Control) but you could still set the old value by setting
> the sysctl to 4. Anything larger then 64 would be truncated as two shifts
> are needed to align with the field leading.
> 
> Does anybody do anything anywhere with the old TOS values like low delay in
> there networking infrastructure? Should this be updated in other places in
> kernel and userland? It's been 20 years since TOS was deprecated and
> replaced with DSCP.
> 
> Any other comments or thought are always welcome.

I cannot speak to network stacks, but we have performed some large scale
DSCP measurements of the Internet and found TOS semantics still in use.
You might want to look up:

Exploring DSCP modification pathologies in mobile edge networks: IEEE/IFIP 
Workshop on Mobile Network Measurement 

I think there is more work in line to be published based on similar
measurement campaigns.

> References:
> 
> Open Review - https://reviews.freebsd.org/D14536
> General DSCP reference - https://www.tucny.com/Home/dscp-tos
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Nick "darkfiberiru" Wolff
> ___
> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

-- 
- [tj]
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

QOS/TOS in carp/freebsd in general

[Nick Wolff]

 Hi,

I currently have a review in to make carp use dscp values on outgoing
packets. This will make it easier to preform QOS on modern switches as we
have been able to drive carp insane on 10g links while throwing storage
traffic at it.On an interesting side note apparently after 64k mac address
moves for a single mac address in the cam table arista 7050t  seems to with
out warning give up and stop moving address but leaves it in the table
where ever it last was.

I was originally going to just toggle between cs7 and the old TOS low delay
setting. But it was requested that I just make it a settable Integer value.
In this case I'm planning to do 0-63 to match dscp with a default of 54
(CS7) (Network Control) but you could still set the old value by setting
the sysctl to 4. Anything larger then 64 would be truncated as two shifts
are needed to align with the field leading.

Does anybody do anything anywhere with the old TOS values like low delay in
there networking infrastructure? Should this be updated in other places in
kernel and userland? It's been 20 years since TOS was deprecated and
replaced with DSCP.

Any other comments or thought are always welcome.

References:

Open Review - https://reviews.freebsd.org/D14536
General DSCP reference - https://www.tucny.com/Home/dscp-tos


Thanks,

Nick "darkfiberiru" Wolff
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"