[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87zlb8l7q3.fsf@caffeine.danplanet.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 12:10:28 -0700
From: Dan Smith <danms@...ibm.com>
To: John Dykstra <john.dykstra1@...il.com>
Cc: containers@...ts.osdl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Oren Laaden <orenl@...columbia.edu>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] c/r: Add AF_INET support (v3)
JD> Why? It seems that this would cause checkpoints to fail
JD> unexpectedly,
Well, there are other places where the checkpoint will fail with EBUSY
because something is in a transitional state.
JD> and is probably unnecessary in a migration scenario, because the
JD> peer will retransmit the segments given appropriate ACKs.
Cool, sounds like we can punt on this particular one... Thanks :)
--
Dan Smith
IBM Linux Technology Center
email: danms@...ibm.com
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists