David Miller wrote:
From: Rick Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 09:55:10 -0700
Fine, but so? I suspect the point of the patch is to provide a
lower cap on the accumulated backoff so data starts flowing over the
connection within that lower cap once the link is
restored/failed-over.
The backoff is there for a reason.
I'm not disputing the general value of the backoff, nor about the value of an
initial value of 60 seconds. In terms of avoiding congestive collapse one does
indeed want the exponential backoff. I'm just in agreement with the person from
Hitachi that allowing someone to tweak the backoff has a certain value.
60 seconds is already a trade-off between a pure (non capped) exponential
backoff and capping the value.
rick
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
