Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] "strict" ipv4 reassembly

From: Ben Greear <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 12:26:23 -0700

David S. Miller wrote:
> From: John Heffner <[email-masked]>
> Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 14:57:38 -0400
> 
> 
>>It would be better still to have a per-route packet reassembly timeout in 
>>milliseconds.
> 
> 
> I agree.  And if we can setup the infrastructure such that the
> drivers can indicate the speed of the link they are communicating
> on, then we can set sane default values on the automatically
> created subnet routes.

I assume you mean more than local physical link speed?  Imagine:

GigE server -- gige-core -- 10bt hub -- gige-core -- gige client

Now, this particular setup would be lame, but the 10bt hub could
really be a bridged WAN, wireless or other slow and not-so-easily
upgraded network link.

Local link speed is relatively easy to figure out using ethtool for the
NICs that support it at least....

Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <[email-masked]>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com