netdev - Re: [RFC] bridge: STP timer management range checking

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <48BDD3A8.6070500@hp.com>
Date:	Tue, 02 Sep 2008 17:00:40 -0700
From:	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, stephen.hemminger@...tta.com,
	shemminger@...tta.com, dusanc@...il.com, romieu@...zoreil.com,
	hancockr@...w.ca, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] bridge: STP timer management range checking

David Miller wrote:
> From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
> Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 09:40:46 -0700
>>Can one change the TCP maximum RTO to be smaller than specified in the specs? 
> We always min-clamp the RTO at RTO calculation time in order to be
> compatible with BSD's coarse grained times.

But tuning TCP_RTO_MAX isn't permitted right?  I'm drawing (perhaps 
flawed) parallels/distinctions between what is/isn't permitted to tweak 
for timers for one protocol versus another and wondering which may be a 
case of sauce for the goose/gander.

rick jones
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html