Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] net: compute a more reasonable default ip6_rt_max_size | From | Eric Dumazet <> | Date | Sat, 26 May 2012 05:39:40 +0200 |
| |
On Fri, 2012-05-25 at 17:44 -0700, Arun Sharma wrote: > On 5/25/12 5:11 PM, David Miller wrote: > > >> These were not admin configured routes. They were discovered via ipv6 > >> neighbor discovery. > > > > Then such default routes should either be: > > > > 1) Passed over by GC > > > > 2) Trigger neighbour discovery when GC'd > > It's possible that there is a bug somewhere - we didn't get a chance to > dig deeper. What we observed is that as we got close to the 4096 limit, > some hosts were becoming unreachable. A modest increase in the routing > table size made things better. > > -Arun
But your patch is not a "modest increase", so whats the deal ?
A modest increase would be 8192 instead of 4096, regardless of RAM size.
| |