Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 17:39:41 -0700 From: Doug Hardie <bc979@lafn.org> To: Michael Tuexen <tuexen@freebsd.org> Cc: Mark Johnston <markj@freebsd.org>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: making SCTP loadable and removing it from GENERIC Message-ID: <380F73C8-1E0F-4FEC-BFEF-4D4DC04A849C@mail.sermon-archive.info> In-Reply-To: <814D36BF-46D9-4093-9D7C-36A79771C742@freebsd.org> References: <20200709151300.GC8947@raichu> <63F4446F-DECF-4DE8-99CA-EC8755A5D4A1@mail.sermon-archive.info> <20200709201044.GG8947@raichu> <3DC5AC46-604E-4CB4-93EC-6421ED575DBB@mail.sermon-archive.info> <814D36BF-46D9-4093-9D7C-36A79771C742@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 9 July 2020, at 14:45, Michael Tuexen <tuexen@freebsd.org> wrote: >=20 >> On 9. Jul 2020, at 23:15, Doug Hardie <bc979@lafn.org> wrote: >>=20 >> Actually, the users of these systems would have no clue about that = message. All they would figure out is that the system is down and they = can't do their job and bitch to the CEO. I am going to assume that that = error will be produced by the socket call and I have added code to check = for it and email me if it occurs. I believe that the only viable = approach for us is the rc.conf solution as some of these systems are = rhapsberry pi 3s which I understand don't use the loader.conf file. > OK. Do you control the kernel which is running on the machines? If = that is the case, > you could add a line to the kernel config, rebuild the kernel and use = that custom > kernel with compiled-in SCTP support. That is still possible. As best as I can tell, compiling a non-generic kernel may not be easily = done. The Pi's are not located anywhere near me and it would be = extremely difficult to deal with any kernel issues. I prefer to live = with generic kernels. Life has been much easer since I switched to = them. >>=20 >> One of the configurations we are considering is for each user to have = their own Rhapsberry Pi and eliminate the central server. All data is = replicated between all the machines so there is no need for a central = server anymore. If I can make that work, it would be a large cost = savings for my client. > If that gets rid of the need to use SCTP, that would also work. SCTP is the heart of the replication system. I had numerous problems = trying to get UDP to work. The record sizes can be up to 28 Mb. I = think it is theoretically possible to be even larger, but I have never = seen any over 28 Mb. SCTP handles that just fine. It also handles = multi-homing which we also use. -- Doug
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?380F73C8-1E0F-4FEC-BFEF-4D4DC04A849C>