Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 21:45:45 +0000 From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> To: "Mike Karels" <mike@karels.net> Cc: freebsd-transport@freebsd.org Subject: Re: virtualizing keepalive parameters Message-ID: <6CC67D12-3304-45FB-9CAE-A99586F4BF20@lists.zabbadoz.net> In-Reply-To: <201611252036.uAPKa32t001436@mail.karels.net> References: <201611252036.uAPKa32t001436@mail.karels.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 25 Nov 2016, at 20:36, Mike Karels wrote: > I just "virtualized" the TCP keepalive parameters for a project at > work, > although it isn't actually VIMAGE. I could easily do the same for > VIMAGE. > It seems like the right thing to do, but I don't know if there have > been > previous discussions on this. Are there any reasons not to do this? There is a possibility that “less trusted” parties inside a jail could keep lots of sockets open for long, but that risk is there anyway. So no, I don’t see a reason not to do it. Feel free to add me to the Review once you upload it. /bz
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6CC67D12-3304-45FB-9CAE-A99586F4BF20>