Re: netlink drops messages.

[jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 18 Jan 2001, Andi Kleen wrote:

> I suspect if someone is really seriously expecting to handle hundreds of
> interface up/down per seconds they would opt for shared memory. For routes
> you do not even need kernel support, because you can do that privately with
> the routing daemon.

Sounds nice. I think hundreds of interface up/down per seconds is extreme
end unless you have "dynamic" type of devices like L2TP which come
and go (lets not go into the interface discussion again ;-<).
Having said that, the router has to be robust to hundreds of interface
up/down per seconds.

cheers,
jamal