Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 21:15:08 +0200 From: Valentin Nechayev <netch@lucky.net> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> Cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: route cacheing for gif(4) should be optional Message-ID: <20041204191508.GA18236@lucky.net> In-Reply-To: <20041129161529.GA4770@cell.sick.ru> References: <20041125140641.GA78210@cell.sick.ru> <20041126025510.GA44246@scylla.towardex.com> <20041126091316.GA84369@cell.sick.ru> <41AB3CB9.598BB2FB@freebsd.org> <20041129161529.GA4770@cell.sick.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 19:15:29, glebius wrote about "Re: route cacheing for gif(4) should be optional": A>> However there have been reasons for A>> storing the rtentry pointer in struct gif. In the old days ip_output() A>> required an rtentry pointer to be passed on, this is no longer the case. A>> And it was sort of a safe-guard to make it harder to send the gif encapsulated A>> packets back through the same gif interface. That didn't work really well A>> and as I say it should be scapped instead of rigged on somewhere else with A>> yet another obscure option. ;) > As soon as I make route cacheing optional, I'd like to make it off by default. > Let me explain: FreeBSD is stable by default, not fast. Routecacheing is not stable. > When a route flap occurs in dynamicly routed network my gif tunnels are stuck. > I'll describe in manpage, that more performance can be achieved by enabling this > route cacheing. Any objections on this default? Tracking Cisco & etc. footsteps, there is yet another variant: add cached route with aging and set default aging time very small (e.g. 1 sec). This can give preferences of caching among with satisfactory time of renewal. I think this will be best variant, but if in a case it isn't adoptable, let's caching will be disabled totally by default. -netch-
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041204191508.GA18236>