[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: opensolaris-networking-discuss
Subject: Re: [networking-discuss] [brussels-dev] shrinking the ndd tunable
From: Darren Reed <Darren.Reed () Sun ! COM>
Date: 2009-02-27 4:46:25
Message-ID: 49A77021.5010302 () Sun ! COM
[Download RAW message or body]
[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]
On 26/02/09 07:57 PM, Sowmini.Varadhan@Sun.COM wrote:
> On (02/26/09 19:49), Peter Memishian wrote:
>> > header template for all tcp packets on a conn. All the ulp ttls seem to
>> > follow a similar pattern. And all of them can be over-ridden by the
>> > IP_TTL sockopt.
>>
>> I don't know why there are so many of these knobs; I suspect the source
>> revision history will tell some interesting stories :-)
>
> I don't know.. smells like a huge copy/paste project here :-)
I can easily imagine, back when Solaris first arrived with a TTL
of 255, that they wanted to provide a knob in case some piece of
network hardware reacted badly because of a bug that assumed 255 == -1.
It is very strange to see a conversation about removing knobs to
tune things in the kernel. Most often we see people talking about
how they would like to be able to tune something that they can't.
In light of that, I'd think twice before removing any tunable.
Especially if we're going to change the default value of any
of them.
Darren
[Attachment #5 (text/html)]
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<tt>On 26/02/09 07:57 PM, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" \
href="mailto:Sowmini.Varadhan@Sun.COM">Sowmini.Varadhan@Sun.COM</a> wrote:</tt> \
<blockquote cite="mid:20090227035725.GE281915@zhadum.east.sun.com" type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><tt>On (02/26/09 19:49), Peter Memishian wrote:
</tt></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><tt> > header template for all tcp packets on a conn. All the ulp \
ttls seem to > follow a similar pattern. And all of them can be over-ridden by \
the > IP_TTL sockopt.
I don't know why there are so many of these knobs; I suspect the source
revision history will tell some interesting stories :-)
</tt></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!----><tt>
I don't know.. smells like a huge copy/paste project here :-)
</tt></pre>
</blockquote>
<tt><br>
I can easily imagine, back when Solaris first arrived with a TTL<br>
of 255, that they wanted to provide a knob in case some piece of<br>
network hardware reacted badly because of a bug that assumed 255 == -1.<br>
<br>
It is very strange to see a conversation about removing knobs to<br>
tune things in the kernel. Most often we see people talking about<br>
how they would like to be able to tune something that they can't.<br>
<br>
In light of that, I'd think twice before removing any tunable.<br>
Especially if we're going to change the default value of any<br>
of them.<br>
<br>
Darren<br>
<br>
</tt>
</body>
</html>
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
networking-discuss@opensolaris.org
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic