[lkml]   [2007]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: sockets affected by IPsec always block (2.6.23)
    On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 10:30:23PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
    > We made an explicit decision not to do things this way.

    Thanks for pointing this out.

    > Non-blocking has a meaning dependant upon the xfrm_larval_drop sysctl
    > setting, and this is across the board. If xfrm_larval_drop is zero,
    > non-blocking semantics do not extend to IPSEC route resolution,
    > otherwise it does.
    > If he sets this sysctl to "1" as I detailed in my reply, he'll
    > get the behavior he wants.

    Does anybody actually need the 0 setting? What would we break if
    the default became 1?

    Visit Openswan at
    Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <>
    Home Page:
    PGP Key:

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-12-05 07:55    [W:0.025 / U:55.252 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site