On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 19:03 +0200, Hannes Gredler wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 05:25:07PM +0200, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
[....]
> | On the sender side: Don't send half TC packets.
> 
> hmmm not really an option ... what to do if the neighbor set > 1500 bytes.
> just because of massive neighbors ?

Good point. Especially if we live in the IPv6 world where IP addresses
somewhat
larger.
Besides IIRC the minimum size of an IP/UDP packet is 512 ...

> | On the receiver side (which shouldn't be necessary with the above):
> | Wait with the TC packet processing until we are sure that it is
> | complete, e.g.
> | if the next is already seen or some timeout.
> 
> what about this:
> 
> rather than deleting the edge we tweak T_time to an expired value (now_times -1).

Much better;-)

> if the neighbor set gets found when processing further packets then T_time
> gets overwritten, otherwise it will get deleted when prcessing eventloop
> next time.

When is "next time"?
It it's too short, we are deleting the routes anyways.

Hmm, the next packet (with the next set of neighbours) will probably
come
"immediately" (read: quite soon). 
If we set the timeout to "now + 1 second" or "now + 0.5 second"?

	Bernd
-- 
Firmix Software GmbH                   http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156                 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
          Embedded Linux Development and Services




