Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:22:29 +0100 From: Rui Paulo <rpaulo@fnop.net> To: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Killing IPTOS_CE and IPTOS_ECT Message-ID: <46DDA265.2090500@fnop.net> In-Reply-To: <46DD59F9.1080107@freebsd.org> References: <46DCB831.3030207@fnop.net> <46DD59F9.1080107@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Andre Oppermann wrote: > Rui Paulo wrote: >> Hi, >> I'm working on TCP ECN support and I would like to kill these defines >> from netinet/ip.h >> >> #if 1 >> /* ECN RFC3168 obsoletes RFC2481, and these will be deprecated soon. */ >> #define IPTOS_CE 0x01 >> #define IPTOS_ECT 0x02 >> #endif >> >> The are outdated and should no longer be used because that RFC has >> been obsoleted. RFC 3168 uses a bit different bits: >> #define IPTOS_ECN_NOTECT 0x00 /* not-ECT */ >> #define IPTOS_ECN_ECT1 0x01 /* ECN-capable transport (1) */ >> #define IPTOS_ECN_ECT0 0x02 /* ECN-capable transport (0) */ >> #define IPTOS_ECN_CE 0x03 /* congestion experienced */ >> #define IPTOS_ECN_MASK 0x03 /* ECN field mask */ >> >> The only consumer of the RFC 2481 defines is sbin/ipfw/ipfw2.c and >> luigi@ accepted the attached patch. >> >> Does anyone have any objection against the removal ? > > No. Please produce a complete unified diff patch including both > the changes to ip.h and ipfw2.c, a sufficiently verbose commit > message, the result a complete make universe build run with the > patch applied to otherwise clean sources and send it to re@ and > me in CC. If approved I commit it for you. Well, I was asking for comments regarding on the usage of these flags. I was hoping to commit ip.h along with TCP ECN. This doesn't really need to be before the branch, I think. -- Rui Paulo
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?46DDA265.2090500>