From: owner-t...@openbsd.org <owner-t...@openbsd.org> on behalf of Stuart
Henderson <s...@spacehopper.org>
Sent: Monday, 2 April 2018 12:06 AM
To: Job Snijders
Cc: tech@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Update default QoS markers for ssh
On 2018/04/01 13:29, Job Sn
On 2018/04/01 08:59, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > I think this is the right thing to do, but needs handling in conjunction
> > with changes to PF, which has dual queue-setting (IPTOS_LOWDELAY packets
>
> pf has to change first??
>
> I don't understand the requirement that pf must be capable of
> I think this is the right thing to do, but needs handling in conjunction
> with changes to PF, which has dual queue-setting (IPTOS_LOWDELAY packets
pf has to change first??
I don't understand the requirement that pf must be capable of handling
this naunce of packets, before any of our
On 2018/04/01 13:29, Job Snijders wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 01, 2018 at 11:29:55AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > On 2018/03/31 16:10, Job Snijders wrote:
> > > TL;DR: I propose to update the defaults to use DSCP "AF21" (Low
> > > Latency Data) for interactive session traffic, and CS1 ("Lower
> > >
On Sun, Apr 01, 2018 at 11:29:55AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2018/03/31 16:10, Job Snijders wrote:
> > TL;DR: I propose to update the defaults to use DSCP "AF21" (Low
> > Latency Data) for interactive session traffic, and CS1 ("Lower
> > Effort") for non-interactive traffic. This applies
On 2018/03/31 16:10, Job Snijders wrote:
> TL;DR: I propose to update the defaults to use DSCP "AF21" (Low Latency
> Data) for interactive session traffic, and CS1 ("Lower Effort") for
> non-interactive traffic. This applies to both IPv4 and IPv6.
I think this is the right thing to do, but needs
Dear all,
There may be opportunity for improvement of ssh(1) and sshd(8)'s default
QoS markers for better integration in environments that can offer either
layer-2 or layer-3 prioritisation profiles. Currently ssh(1) and sshd(8)
set obsoleted values 'lowdelay' for interactive sessions and
