[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53CCD6F2.6020909@nod.at>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 11:01:38 +0200
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: "Yue Zhang (OSTC DEV)" <yuezha@...rosoft.com>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"driverdev-devel@...uxdriverproject.org"
<driverdev-devel@...uxdriverproject.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"olaf@...fle.de" <olaf@...fle.de>,
"jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>,
Thomas Shao <huishao@...rosoft.com>,
Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hyperv: Trigger DHCP renew after host hibernation
Yue,
Am 21.07.2014 10:44, schrieb Yue Zhang (OSTC DEV):
> Hi, Richard
>
> IMHO, all networking implementations should handle the cable offline event. Consider
> this situation. I unplugged the network cable and connect it to a new network switch
> after 10 seconds. If the DHCP renew is not triggered, the network will break. I think in
> normal cases, it should already been handled properly. Unless there is a strong
> justification for not doing this. In that case, we shouldn't renew DHCP anyway.
I agree that they should handle the cable offline event.
My concern is that 10 seconds is maybe not a the right choice.
(As we cannot know all implementations)
Thanks,
//richard
--
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