From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
To: David Lamparter <equinox@diac24.net>
Cc: Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@jauu.net>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
hans.schillstrom@ericsson.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC Hanging clean-up of a namespace
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 14:10:17 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F1894C9.8060200@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120119214718.GC3347849@jupiter.n2.diac24.net>
On 01/19/2012 01:47 PM, David Lamparter wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 10:40:53PM +0100, Hagen Paul Pfeifer wrote:
>> * Eric W. Biederman | 2012-01-19 13:24:13 [-0800]:
>>
>>> This thread is a fascinating disconnect from reality all of the way
>>> around.
>>>
>>> - inet_twsk_purge already implements throwing out of timewait sockets
>>> when a network namespaces is being cleaned up. So the RFC is nonsense.
>>
>> This is how it is implemented, not how it should be. TIME_WAIT is not the
>> problem, it is there to keep the stack from sending wrong RST messages. Maybe
>> the 2*MSL could be fixed by a more accurate 2*RTT.
>
> I may have made that argument hidden behind a joke, but please refer to
> the development of RFC 793's bootup "quiet time". The reason no one
> sticks to this quiet time is that TCP timestamps have obsoleted it by
> providing a better frame of reference. Refer to RFC 1323 Appendix B
> "DUPLICATES FROM EARLIER CONNECTION INCARNATIONS".
May one actually, safely assume that timestamps are universally in place?
rick jones
suspects that no one stuck to the quiet time in the (more distant)
timestamp-free past simply because booting took "long enough" anyway...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-19 22:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-19 11:07 RFC Hanging clean-up of a namespace Hans Schillstrom
2012-01-19 13:31 ` David Lamparter
2012-01-19 17:40 ` David Miller
2012-01-19 19:01 ` David Lamparter
2012-01-19 19:06 ` David Miller
2012-01-19 19:25 ` David Lamparter
2012-01-19 19:31 ` David Miller
2012-01-19 19:53 ` David Lamparter
2012-01-19 20:27 ` David Miller
2012-01-19 21:03 ` David Lamparter
2012-01-19 21:24 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-01-19 21:40 ` David Lamparter
2012-01-19 21:40 ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2012-01-19 21:47 ` David Lamparter
2012-01-19 22:10 ` Rick Jones [this message]
2012-01-19 22:16 ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2012-01-19 22:37 ` David Miller
2012-01-20 6:08 ` Hans Schillstrom
2012-01-20 10:08 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-01-20 11:51 ` Hans Schillstrom
2012-01-20 20:55 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-01-23 6:07 ` Hans Schillstrom
2012-01-23 6:25 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-01-23 6:58 ` Hans Schillstrom
2012-01-23 7:17 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-01-23 7:30 ` Hans Schillstrom
2012-01-23 7:55 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-01-19 19:40 ` Hans Schillström
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4F1894C9.8060200@hp.com \
--to=rick.jones2@hp.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=equinox@diac24.net \
--cc=hagen@jauu.net \
--cc=hans.schillstrom@ericsson.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).