I suspected that that was what's happening, but it wasn't obvious. Thanks for
clarifying!
Lars
On Mar 14, 2013, at 10:29, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote:
> On 14.03.2013 17:56, Eggert, Lars wrote:
>> Hi,
> Hello.
>>
>> interpreting these bits as a TOS field has been deprecated since RFC2474 was
On 14.03.2013 17:56, Eggert, Lars wrote:
Hi,
Hello.
interpreting these bits as a TOS field has been deprecated since RFC2474 was
published in 1998. Since then, we've been having a DSCP codepoint and ECN bits
in the IP header.
Yes. I'm going to commit DSCP-based approach, so I'm grabbing all
Hi,
interpreting these bits as a TOS field has been deprecated since RFC2474 was
published in 1998. Since then, we've been having a DSCP codepoint and ECN bits
in the IP header.
It would be actively harmful to add TOS byte support 15 years after it was
deprecated. Read http://en.wikipedia.org/
Synopsis: [ipfw] [patch] add support to ToS IP PRECEDENCE fields
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-ipfw->melifaro
Responsible-Changed-By: melifaro
Responsible-Changed-When: Thu Mar 14 13:48:37 UTC 2013
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Take.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=121122
__
Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Synopsis: [ipfw] [patch] add support to ToS IP PRECEDENCE fields
>> Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-ipfw
>> Responsible-Changed-By: araujo
>> Responsible-Changed-When: Tue Feb 26 19:08:49 UTC 2008
>> Responsible-Changed-Wh
Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
> Marcelo Araujo wrote:
>> Yes, I've interest to work around this function, this work help me for
>> my degree project.
>> I think also this work is a good opportunity to work in SoC 2008.
>
> I think this work is too easy for the SoC'08 :)
>
Hi all,
Well, yesterday I star
Marcelo Araujo wrote:
Yes, I've interest to work around this function, this work help me for
my degree project.
I think also this work is a good opportunity to work in SoC 2008.
I think this work is too easy for the SoC'08 :)
--
WBR, Andrey V. Elsukov
__
27.02.08 @ 11:19 Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
I talked to Roman when he submitted his first patch about
it's design. What you think about making TOK_SETIPTOSPRE not
an action, but a modifier? I think it will be much usable.
Agree. If it is more general ``modip'', one could wish to change more than
Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
> Hi, Marcelo.
>
> I talked to Roman when he submitted his first patch about
> it's design. What you think about making TOK_SETIPTOSPRE not
> an action, but a modifier? I think it will be much usable.
> A syntax example:
>
> # ipfw add allow iptospre flashover ip from any t
Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
> Hi, Marcelo.
>
> I talked to Roman when he submitted his first patch about
> it's design. What you think about making TOK_SETIPTOSPRE not
> an action, but a modifier? I think it will be much usable.
> A syntax example:
>
> # ipfw add allow iptospre flashover ip from any
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Synopsis: [ipfw] [patch] add support to ToS IP PRECEDENCE fields
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-ipfw
Responsible-Changed-By: araujo
Responsible-Changed-When: Tue Feb 26 19:08:49 UTC 2008
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Over to maintainer(s).
http://www.fr
Synopsis: [ipfw] [patch] add support to ToS IP PRECEDENCE fields
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-ipfw
Responsible-Changed-By: araujo
Responsible-Changed-When: Tue Feb 26 19:08:49 UTC 2008
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Over to maintainer(s).
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?p
12 matches
Mail list logo
