On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, Milam, Chad wrote:
> the fact that i am using 2.2 is stated in the subject line. i did neglect to
> put it explicitly put it in the message (sorry). it is, however, also
> diff/patch file.
I apologize. I spent all my time rambling to you based on 2.4 code ;-<
> I also do not think that nuking valid routes in the cache will produce any
> major issues, other than slowing things down for a few seconds. the cache
> is just the cache, not the real route table. and yes, it pretty much
> guarantees the route cache will be purged, therefore avoiding a reboot and
> avoiding a quickly repeated overflow...
Typically most of the code will check for the dst cache or some
dereferencing within it before using it. I am not sure we can
swear by this ;-> i suppose we will find out when you get an oops ;->
maybe you should just purge the routes marked as expired.