On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 2011-12-19 at 17:36 +0100, Helmut Schaa wrote: > >> >> We could also reuse the TID used by the source STA but I guess we should >> >> always classify frames according to our own mapping instead of relying >> >> on the associated STAs to do the right thing. >> > >> > Not sure that's useful, since we classify almost nothing anyway. >> >> Currently we only use the IPv4 DSCP field for assigning TIDs to >> frames. That seems to be sufficient for VOIP traffic at least. >> >> > If this was somehow hooked up to tc or iptables that would be >> > more useful I guess? >> >> Agreed. This would make sense in the future but I don't feel like >> implementing this right now. >> >> So, you'd prefer to just copy over the TID as used by the source >> STA (via the priority+256 hack maybe)? > > Seems simpler to me really, at least right now and as default. Not sure, > maybe other people have more opinion? :) > > I just don't expect anyone to hack the kernel for their local policy, > and using what the STA wanted seems OK? If you run wifi networks you > kinda trust them already anyway :) Fine with me. I'll change the patch to keep the priority the STA used ... Helmut -- 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
