On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 10:44 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb < bzeeb-li...@lists.zabbadoz.net> wrote:
> On Jun 28, 2011, at 8:27 PM, Christian Kratzer wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > On Tue, 28 Jun 2011, Pawel Tyll wrote: > >> Hi Adrian, > >> > >>> Good news ! > >>> Last night I remove FLOWTABLE option and since then the server is > stable. > >>> No crash what so ever an I was able to increase the number of tunnels. > >> Yeah, FLOWTABLE still needs work, good news on the stability. Could > >> you perhaps drop us all a note in two weeks if things keep stable? > > > > from all I have seen all the work FLOWTABLE needs is finally being > > dropped from the tree. Its a constant cause of trouble and from what > > I recall not even ipv6 capable. > > Well, I'd like to point you at > > http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=219775 > and as an example at: > > http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/sys/net/route.c?r1=223334&r2=223333&pathrev=223334 > > That said, for some workloads it may be a fairly reasonable option. > Hi Bjoern, Perhaps it would be best to document what those particular workloads are. Apparently, systems with small and seldom changing routing tables are good candidates. However, the distinction is not immediately obvious by skimming through the list archives. Regards, Vlad -- Good, fast & cheap. Pick any two. _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
