From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bill Fink Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] Document future removal of sysctl_tcp_* options Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 00:32:45 -0400 Message-ID: <20091022003245.5cd4885c.billfink@mindspring.com> References: <1256115421-12714-1-git-send-email-gilad@codefidence.com> <1256115421-12714-9-git-send-email-gilad@codefidence.com> <4ADED6FA.2030502@gmail.com> <4ADEE119.7020803@codefidence.com> <4ADF616B.1090405@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 Return-path: Received: from elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.68]:37170 "EHLO elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751263AbZJVEck (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Oct 2009 00:32:40 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4ADF616B.1090405@gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 21 Oct 2009, William Allen Simpson wrote: > Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote: > > I have no issue with leaving those, if everyone thinks we're better off. > > > > BTW, while we're talking about OS envy, I do believe that Windows do let > > you specify on a per route basis. Not that this is really a good ground for > > technical decision, but still... :-) > > > I'm not concerned with "envy", I'm concerned with training operators, and > consistency across platforms. > > I'm in favor of per route configuration, it seems reasonably clean, as > long as it's done consistently with other systems. I don't permit Windows > systems to be used here (except under controlled security circumstances), so > I'm not familiar with their configuration. However, doing things similarly > across platforms will ease documentation and training. And as mentioned previously, the global options can be quite useful in certain test scenarios. I also agree the per route settings are a very useful addition. I think the global and per route settings are complementary and shouldn't be thought of as in conflict with one another. -Bill