--/Q7FmPuhIbtiu4EM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 09:39:17PM +0200, Thomas E. Spanjaard wrote:
> Christos Zoulas wrote:
>  > Currently altq can be used without a packet filter. Is it desirable to
> >keep that functionality?
>=20
> That is desirable, for instance for third-party firewalls (tunix?). See=
=20
> my other post from a minute ago.

If we have altq processing prioritisation, on the basis of mtag's
added by packet classifiers such as pf/ipf, it would be nice to also
have vlan(4) process the 802.1p bits of the 802.1q header, and add
QoS tags accordingly.

What other things might usefully add prioritisation tags in this
model? routes? sockopts?

--
Dan.


--/Q7FmPuhIbtiu4EM
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFDOK3rEAVxvV4N66cRAojlAJ9RN3mC9Ew8dDpFEoP5GrnAof2/IwCg+Pzn
dw7vrSk7pUe7KAZrWtwWwBw=
=2Nnn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--/Q7FmPuhIbtiu4EM--