From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [RFC] Vegas and tcp parameters per route Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 13:30:34 -0800 Sender: linux-net-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20040315133034.487caee1@dell_ss3.pdx.osdl.net> References: <20040312151729.25d9c696@dell_ss3.pdx.osdl.net> <1079160064.11606.15.camel@viivi> <20040315092018.1e843d83@dell_ss3.pdx.osdl.net> <20040315132214.4d9b5347.davem@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: pasi.sarolahti@iki.fi, netdev@oss.sgi.com, linux-net@vger.kernel.org Return-path: To: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <20040315132214.4d9b5347.davem@redhat.com> List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 13:22:14 -0800 "David S. Miller" wrote: > On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 09:20:18 -0800 > Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > > Would it be too complicated, if sysctl would give the global default, > > > from which one can deviate using RTAX_FEATURE? > > > > Maybe for frto it needs to stay, but sysctl's are more painful and complex > > than keeping the stuff in the routing info. Also, the external tools are > > part of every distro, except for a few embedded systems, the networking code > > depends on user tools already. > > How do you propose to support some kind of "global enable" for features. The easiest way to do that is to initialize each TP with features from sysctl when created. > I think sysctl's support this quite well. The test for the feature > becomes "sysctl || route_attribute". That is what the next version does for FRTO. > Also, as Yoshfuji stated, you absolutely cannot change the existing > sysctl numbers as tools that use the sysctl() system call use those > numbers explicitly thus they are compiled into applications. Okay, what about WESTWOOD? > I really am not going to consider something that removes existing > sysctl tunables. :-) What about tcp_westwood which is new?