Hi, On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 04:12:59PM +0000, Mackinnon, Ian wrote: > > Well, in theory it should at least have the benefit of proper memory > > protection between processes, and thus, less likely to crash the whole > > box if a process does stupid things. > > > Interesting, so given the email earlier today by somebody experiencing > BGP problems at a well known IX with lots of sessions where the other > end is shut down, would this have still been an issue?
I'm not really sure what is happening there - but I doubt that modular
would help much with "a process is burning CPU needlessly".
> It's been a while since I looked at modular, but is there not a large
> "IOS" process that is most things in one place anyway?
I'm not exactly sure how it works. There's different kinds of processes,
some of them having "sub-processes".
The one that has BGP in it is "iprouting.iosproc". All the "old IOS stuff"
seems to be "ios-base".
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
//www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany [email protected]
fax: +49-89-35655025 [email protected]
pgppEx97tOKTu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
