netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: netlink drops messages.

To: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: netlink drops messages.
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 13:39:32 +0200
Cc: kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20010117120652.A1830@fred.local>; from ak@muc.de on Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 12:06:52PM +0100
References: <20010116200600.C5122@nbase.co.il> <200101161828.VAA31502@ms2.inr.ac.ru> <20010117101720.F5122@nbase.co.il> <20010117120652.A1830@fred.local>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 12:06:52PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 09:19:45AM +0100, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 09:28:34PM +0300, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > Hello!
> > > 
> > > > Resync should be an exception and not the rule IMO.
> > > 
> > > If in your system simultaneous UP of 100 interfaces is not an exception. 
> > > 8)
> > Forget about interfaces :). Suppose I have BGP router with 100.000 prefixes 
> > on
> > one interface. When interface goes UP my router daemon adds all this 
> > prefixes
> > to the kernel. This will generate burst of netlink messages right?
> 
> Netlink sendmsg does flow control based on the buffer.
>

But if there is another process listening to netlink and it wants to know about 
routing
table changes. Will kernel stop the process that adds routes to the routing 
table until
reading process will empty the socket? I hope not.
 
--
                        Gleb.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>