Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 13:01:06 -0600 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.net> To: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> Subject: Re: Bug in userland PPP LQR? Message-ID: <200707141901.NAA27366@lariat.net> In-Reply-To: <20070714114132.6b395616@dev.lan.Awfulhak.org> References: <200707110014.SAA02181@lariat.net> <ousa931n9u85mja8m4d26p0r3ol1g3h062@4ax.com> <200707120114.TAA28481@lariat.net> <20070714114132.6b395616@dev.lan.Awfulhak.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 12:41 PM 7/14/2007, Brian Somers wrote: >> disable lqr >> allow lqr > >accept lqr > >> enable echo >> echoperiod 12 > >set echoperiod 12 Yes, found and fixed both of these mistakes. >I'd also add "set log +lqm" to your configuration. Will try that. >I expect unacknowledged LQR packets to be resent >5 times (exactly the same packet), and the 6th >timeout to cause a line drop. That's what I thought too. But it seems as if a single dropped packet among plenty of successful ones can cause the session to drop. This is why I am wondering if the counter is properly reset or if one missed packet leads to a permanent loss of synchronization. >The spec says that the peer may ignore an LQR >request if it's under load, but that it must >respond to a duplicate LQR request. My suspicion >is that some implementations just ignore LQR >altogether under load. These implementations >should disable LQR if they can't implement it >properly. I'm mostly dealing with the Linux pppd or ports of it on the clients (since it seems to be the most popular open source implementation, regardless of quality). --Brett Glass
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200707141901.NAA27366>