Re: [PATCH] Clean up fib_hash datastructures

[jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2004-09-21 at 08:07, Andi Kleen wrote:

> I didn't know you were addicted to glossyware, jamal ;-)

Not me, but i have the unfortunate luck (is there such a thing?)
to deal with foolish people everyday ;->
Theres a lot of glossyware out there that claims they are more
1812 compliant than Linux. They specifically mention Linux.
Think of a midlevel manager (who just read network magazine) and now
armed with a check list;-> 
I know a "marketing" arguement is a weak one - but having been
victimized i thought id share it. 

> You could still do routing by TOS, all you would need to do is to 
> set up a netfilter rule that checks the TOS and set an fwmark, then
> route based on that.
> 
> The only thing you lose is ICMP redirect routes per TOS.
> I'm not sure it is worth keeping. And making the FIB scale
> better would likely look far better in the glossyware than
> that. 

I think FIB scalaing is first priority. In the past you could
selectively turn off TOS checking at compile. Why cant we do it that
way?


cheers,
jamal