From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH] TCPCT+1: initial SYN exchange with SYNACK data Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 01:06:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20091005.010630.214808506.davem@davemloft.net> References: <4AC79905.1030904@gmail.com> <20091005.002719.146534039.davem@davemloft.net> <4AC9A714.7060903@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: william.allen.simpson@gmail.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:49742 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758539AbZJEIGh (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Oct 2009 04:06:37 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4AC9A714.7060903@gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: William Allen Simpson Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 03:58:12 -0400 > I see we're cross-posting at the same time.... Since in your previous > review (last year) this issue was not mentioned, is there some other > data organization that you would suggest? > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/102779 > > "This looks mostly fine to me. I would even advocate not using a > config > option for this." I'm looking at the patch more closely, and as I learn more things about your change, my position changes. > Perhaps you would prefer this as a config option after all? No, then nobody is going to deploy this thing (meaning it really will be useless), or everyone will and everyone will enable it and thus eat the space. It's bad either way. Store the data either somewhere else or in an extremely compact form.