Re: Packet size s Re: [PATCH 2/2]: Use `unsigned' for packet lengths

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> In short: my suggestion is to keep an experimental patch for this and I would even offer to
>           keep one up-to-date and online, if in return we can simplify the socket API. Does
>           this sound like a more convincing argument?

Fair enough, I think we should go this way for now, please post here
the patch that provides the experimental feature of explicitely
setting the packet size, interested people can try and use it and
report their findings, later we can get back and possibly merge the
patch if it proves useful.

Basically my patches from a month or two ago would do this with a  few
changes. I'd say merge average patch, I'll update mine to go on top
(tomorrow??) and allow a mechanism to switch to use it.

Ian
--
Ian McDonald
Web: http://wand.net.nz/~iam4
Blog: http://imcdnzl.blogspot.com
WAND Network Research Group
Department of Computer Science
University of Waikato
New Zealand
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dccp" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [IETF DCCP]     [Linux Networking]     [Git]     [Security]     [Linux Assembly]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux