lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Aug]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: Dest Unreach Rate limits, was: Re: Linux 2.1.x showstopper list
    Date
    Hello!

    > This is a good point I forgot. Do you think it would add too much overhead
    > if a "JUNK" flag could be added that is tested by rt_fast_clean() ?

    Seems, this flag (or even number) is necessary.
    And for IPv6 too, so that route "value" probably should be
    placed in dst_entry.

    > There are unfortunately no RTCF_* bits left (except for maybe RTCF_NOTIFY,

    BTW routes with RTCF_NOTIFY should be purged last. 8)
    At least, they have maximal value. It is supposed
    that kernel should send notifications every time when such
    route becomes stale. I still did not implement it
    neither in pimd nor in rsvpd, so that this place is reserved
    for future.

    > There are no reports yet about problems caused by this, but I generally
    > think it is better to fix potential problems before they get exploited
    > in production.

    Certainly, you are right. Especially, if we had more hands
    and less real problems 8)

    Alexey

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:44    [W:0.027 / U:61.056 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site