Sorry for the self-reply. That's what you get when you send e-mail at the
first crack of noon.
What about putting multiple netlink messages in one datagram?
Will perhaps do that. :-)
Remark: error handling become more tricky -- but for just 2 messages it
should be fine.
Do you think that
If you work with atomic route replacement even putting ALL of them
into a netlink message (or as many as you can fit in) works.
Henning
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Matthieu Boutier
bout...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote:
I agree, but I would like to know how many packets we lose. Since
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com wrote:
Interface index is not a problem... metric-change is.
I am sorry, I do not understand, once again.
If the route has the same destination and metric, you will overwrite
it with an atomic update, regardless of the outgoing
If you work with atomic route replacement even putting ALL of them
into a netlink message (or as many as you can fit in) works.
What I understand is that we can't (in general) work with atomic
*next-hop* replacement (interface index and metric may change).
I proposed a workaround where instead
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 6:35 AM, Henning Rogge hro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Matthieu Boutier
bout...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote:
If you work with atomic route replacement even putting ALL of them
into a netlink message (or as many as you can fit in) works.
What
All 3 of those are GPL, AFAICT? That doesn't make for a good reference
if you want a permissive license for your code.
Agreed. (And agreed with Henning, we can look, we just cannot touch.)
-- Juliusz
___
Babel-users mailing list
Well, I tried the patches and they did not work (as expected), but I
think we are closer. I will try to create some test cases using ip
route to do what I want, and get back to folk when I have time. I have
a ton of other reasons to want to grok the netlink code more deeply.
I note that I called
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I tried the patches and they did not work (as expected), but I
think we are closer. I will try to create some test cases using ip
route to do what I want, and get back to folk when I have time. I have
a ton of other
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek
j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote:
Babel (dont know about OLSR) finds a usable path, then tunes to a
better one, but each tuning step (particularly at high rates) can lose
packets, which cause rate reductions. Ideally would like to never
Babel (dont know about OLSR) finds a usable path, then tunes to a
better one, but each tuning step (particularly at high rates) can lose
packets, which cause rate reductions. Ideally would like to never lose
packets while tuning happens.
I agree, but I would like to know how many packets we
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek
j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote:
Babel (dont know about OLSR) finds a usable path, then tunes to a
better one, but each tuning step (particularly at high rates) can lose
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Matthieu Boutier
bout...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote:
I think the unique key for the route is destination, routing table
and metric. The metric part is important, if you put the routing
protocol path cost into the route, atomic replacement will not work.
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there anywhere a good reference to netlink?
I mostly use the source code of the ip route command. I don't think
anyone ever got to the point writing good documentation.
Be happy, you could be working with the multicast
Is there anywhere a good reference to netlink?
iproute2, libnl, kernel sources ?
If I understand it correctly you just need to set the routes with
NLM_F_CREATE | NLM_F_REPLACE to get the atomic replacement.
-DEFINES = $(PLATFORM_DEFINES) -DVERSION=\$(VERSION)\
+DEFINES =
Phh... this is a good question... I would guess YES, otherwise the
whole source-specific routing would not work.
Ok course, I was confused.
-const int has_atomic_replacement = has_ipv6_subtrees; /* Dave says that
if a
+const int has_atomic_replacement = has_ipv6_subtrees
I think the unique key for the route is destination, routing table
and metric. The metric part is important, if you put the routing
protocol path cost into the route, atomic replacement will not work.
Interesting (so the previous patch is wrong). Did you know about the
source part? (RTA_SRC)
Good as a reference... not that good for copying code directly.
Henning
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 6:58 PM, Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 10:56:41 +0200, Matthieu Boutier wrote:
Is there anywhere a good reference to netlink?
iproute2, libnl, kernel sources ?
17 matches
Mail list logo
