On Thu, 2005-01-12 at 16:39 +0100, Krzysztof Halasa wrote: > jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> This bit alone doesn't tell if it's dormant or, for example, simply down > >> (either admin or carrier). > > > dormant is an operational state and _not_ an admin state. > > And, in your opinion, changing admin state has not effect on operational > state? >
That is already _very well taken care of_. Has always been and is not a discussion issue at all. Every time i read you mentioning admin state in the same breath as operational state it has connotations of them being the same thing. > > How is this different from say a link flip-flopping? > > It is. Thomas or Stefan will probably explain it to you in details, I'm > too tired. > Ok, I will wait. > > Which is something > > that could happen today even without these changes? > > Sure. But the changes are said to "fix" it, without success (of course, > they can't succeed without doing what I outlined, that's just > theoretically impossible, and OTOH not needed at all). > And i fail to see how. > > Stefans code does protect against that with a damping time. > > What do you exactly mean? > In the case of a link flapping: This could be because of a faulty phy, cable etc on ethernet for example, it is possible that states will rapidly oscillating between the up and down states. Stefans code does not generate a netlink message everytime for such flip-flopping. Factor that with these netlink messages could infact be lost and then tell me how this is any different from what you seem to be insisting is a race. [your rant about your super-patch ignored from now on] cheers, jamal - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
