From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Graf Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] "strict" ipv4 reassembly Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 13:30:30 +0200 Message-ID: <20050518113030.GA15391@postel.suug.ch> References: <20050517.104947.112621738.davem@davemloft.net> <20050518004733.GG13748@postel.suug.ch> <20050518011632.GA27813@gondor.apana.org.au> <20050518013712.GH13748@postel.suug.ch> <20050518015213.GB28070@gondor.apana.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "David S. Miller" , akepner@sgi.com, netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: Herbert Xu Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050518015213.GB28070@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org * Herbert Xu <20050518015213.GB28070@gondor.apana.org.au> 2005-05-18 11:52 > On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 03:37:12AM +0200, Thomas Graf wrote: > > > > OK, I initially thought you would head for a much larger > > threshold. Not sure if 30000 is large enough for a full > > scale NFS server though ;-> You conviced me that my idea > > I think it's big enough. If it isn't it means that somebody > has reordered the packets by 30000 which I find hard to > believe :) I was thinking about some kind of nfs server with huge recv buffers and increased limits receiving at 50kpps experiencing a delayed fragment once in a while. Definitely a rare case but not impossible ;->