On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 15:47:41 +0200, Kalle Valo <kalle.valo@xxxxxx> wrote: > But that's just because of mistakes with DiffServ and other QoS > "frameworks". They didn't bother to specify how applications should > use these. And what matters here IMHO. TOS lets the application specify whether they want low-delay (interactive low bandwidth traffic), high bandwidth (bulk traffic), high reliability or low cost. It's surely vague, but anything "uniform" solution is bound to be vague. Some applications *do* set those fields, or provide options to set them up. And contrary to SO_PRIORITY, it *can* be made to work for non-local queues, if the applications are trusted. I am afraid it's too late for anything more uniform at the socket API level. Even fewer developers would bother to support Linux>=2.6.3x-specific options, than TOS/TCLASS. -- Rémi Denis-Courmont http://www.remlab.net http://fi.linkedin.com/in/remidenis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
