From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.22] TCP: Make TCP_RTO_MAX a variable (take 2) Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 09:16:43 -0700 Message-ID: <46D59BEB.1080602@hp.com> References: <20070712.132448.115910193.davem@davemloft.net> <20070828.220447.01366772.noboru.obata.ar@hitachi.com> <20070828.133057.107937654.davem@davemloft.net> <20070829.212613.65744831.noboru.obata.ar@hitachi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: davem@davemloft.net, shemminger@linux-foundation.org, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: OBATA Noboru Return-path: Received: from palrel10.hp.com ([156.153.255.245]:45495 "EHLO palrel10.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755915AbXH2QR0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:17:26 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070829.212613.65744831.noboru.obata.ar@hitachi.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org OBATA Noboru wrote: > What about another option to let TCP have a notification? > > Can it be a solution if it is standardized? It would at best be a partial solution which would only work when the link failover/whatnot happened on the same system/node as the TCP endpoint. Then it can be some sort of call-back to TCP or the like. If this failover is out in the middle of the cloud the only way to get a notification back to TCP would be by sending it a packet of some sort and I don't see that happening. rick jones