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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans