From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: bert hubert Subject: Re: tcp congestion policy selection link order fragile Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 17:40:48 +0200 Message-ID: <20060918154048.GA18240@outpost.ds9a.nl> References: <20060917122153.GA2932@outpost.ds9a.nl> <20060918.015130.34760190.davem@davemloft.net> <20060918095936.GA6161@outpost.ds9a.nl> <20060918.070600.107685035.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: shemminger@osdl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from outpost.ds9a.nl ([213.244.168.210]:14731 "EHLO outpost.ds9a.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751789AbWIRPku (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Sep 2006 11:40:50 -0400 To: David Miller Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060918.070600.107685035.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 07:06:00AM -0700, David Miller wrote: > Any ordering scheme is wrong or unexpected for _somebody_. Look how I agree violently. Would you agree that it would be best to have a mechanism that explicitly sets a sane default, and does not rely on ordering? My implementation indeed broke your intentions, but would you be open to revamping things so the default policy is not dependent on load order? What would the desired default be, 'BIC' in all cases? Thanks. -- http://www.PowerDNS.com Open source, database driven DNS Software http://netherlabs.nl Open and Closed source services