| To: | Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: netdev.stats change suggestion |
| From: | Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 24 Jan 2002 03:29:04 -0800 |
| Cc: | Dmitrii Tisnek <dima@xxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <3C4FEEE6.6E44E6EE@mandrakesoft.com> |
| References: | <Pine.OSF.4.30.0201231450280.15676-100000@kosh.hut.fi> <20020124112023.GA31956@tapu.f00f.org> <3C4FEEE6.6E44E6EE@mandrakesoft.com> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.3.26i |
On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 06:24:22AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
We should make them 64-bit because related SNMP MIBs use 64-bits.
(1) Do we need atomic add/sub for any of these? If so, making them
64-bit sucks terribly.
(2) What can't snmpd detect and deal with wrap? I know for certain
SNMP operations things are supposed to be strictly increasing for
the life-time the machine is up --- but is this really a big deal?
SNMP albeit a very useful thing and times, is also horribly crude
and has some terrible limitations, it alone doesn't seem like a
good reason to me.
Comments?
--cw
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: netdev.stats change suggestion, Jeff Garzik |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: netdev.stats change suggestion, Jeff Garzik |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: netdev.stats change suggestion, Jeff Garzik |
| Next by Thread: | Re: netdev.stats change suggestion, Jeff Garzik |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |