mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Requesting clarification on IPTOS_* values w/regard to RFC-1349
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:30:05 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3B7862FD.BBDF0C51@candelatech.com> (raw)

I have a hard time believing that the kernel is wrong
on something so basic, but I cannot reconcile RFC-1349
with include/linux/ip.h

Here is the snippet from RFC-1349, found here:
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/cgi-bin/rfc/rfc1349.html

****************************************************************************
3 Specification of the Type of Service Octet

    The TOS facility is one of the features of the Type of Service
    octet in the IP datagram header. The Type of Service
    octet consists of three fields: 

                    0     1     2     3     4     5     6     7
                 +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
                 |                 |                       |     |
                 |   PRECEDENCE    |          TOS          | MBZ |
                 |                 |                       |     |
                 +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+

    The first field, labeled "PRECEDENCE" above, is intended to denote the
    importance or priority of the datagram. This
    field is not discussed in detail in this memo. 
****************************************************************************


However, include/linux/ip.h defines the values as if RFC-1349 numbered
the bits backwards.  (It appears to me, for example, that the TOS_MASK
should be, in binary: 0111 1000, not 0001 1110 as ip.h shows.)

*************************************************
/* SOL_IP socket options */

#define IPTOS_TOS_MASK		0x1E
#define IPTOS_TOS(tos)		((tos)&IPTOS_TOS_MASK)
#define	IPTOS_LOWDELAY		0x10
#define	IPTOS_THROUGHPUT	0x08
#define	IPTOS_RELIABILITY	0x04
#define	IPTOS_MINCOST		0x02
*************************************************


Am I even more confused than normal, or is this really a problem?


Thanks,
Ben


-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>          <Ben_Greear@excite.com>
President of Candela Technologies Inc      http://www.candelatech.com
ScryMUD:  http://scry.wanfear.com     http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear

             reply	other threads:[~2001-08-13 23:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-08-13 23:30 Ben Greear [this message]
2001-08-13 23:50 ` Roland Dreier

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3B7862FD.BBDF0C51@candelatech.com \
    --to=greearb@candelatech.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®