On 8/16/07, Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem with socket options is how does the application know
> the correct policy? Pushing configuration to application is just deferring
> the problem, not solving it. You want some policy to be done by the
> infrastructure; that mean
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:21:14 -0700
"Luis Carlos Cobo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/30/07, Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > it would need an IP ttl to mesh mapping. The fundamental thing is to try
> > and avoid topology specific options bleeding all the way up the socket
> > l
On 7/30/07, Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> it would need an IP ttl to mesh mapping. The fundamental thing is to try
> and avoid topology specific options bleeding all the way up the socket layer,
> especially since the network layer is involved and may need to multipath.
I think th
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:37:20 -0700
"Javier Cardona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On 7/27/07, Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In this case perhaps you can have a table that maps skb->priority to
> > mesh ttl? priorty can already by handled by existing setsockopt ca
Hi Stephen,
On 7/27/07, Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In this case perhaps you can have a table that maps skb->priority to
> mesh ttl? priorty can already by handled by existing setsockopt calls,
> and modified by netfilter and QoS managements.
Thanks for the feedback. IMHO over
On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:22:22 -0400
Dan Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 20:56 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 12:29:24PM -0700, Javier Cardona wrote:
> > > I'm currently working on per-packet mesh ttl. My plan is to register
> > > new mesh so
On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 20:56 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 12:29:24PM -0700, Javier Cardona wrote:
> > I'm currently working on per-packet mesh ttl. My plan is to register
> > new mesh sockopts through netfilter. The user interface will be:
>
> NACK. Drivers should ne
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 12:29:24PM -0700, Javier Cardona wrote:
> I'm currently working on per-packet mesh ttl. My plan is to register
> new mesh sockopts through netfilter. The user interface will be:
NACK. Drivers should never add sockopt, and drivers should not abuse
netfilter hooks.
-
To un
On Tue, 2007-07-03 at 12:29 -0700, Javier Cardona wrote:
> David Woodhouse suggested that this list is a more appropriate forum
> for my message...
Attached is Javier's proposed patch for this. Please flame away.
Dan
---
Resent per Dan's request.
Support for usi
David Woodhouse suggested that this list is a more appropriate forum
for my message...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Javier Cardona <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Jul 3, 2007 11:49 AM
Subject: Proposed interface for per-packet mesh-ttl
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Libertas-dev
10 matches
Mail list logo
