Le 10/02/2016 12:59, David Ahern a écrit :
On 2/10/16 12:15 PM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
[snip]
Instead of removing completly the sysctl entries, another idea could be to
manage a group of interfaces which will share the same subtree.
This come out from a side conversation as well -- for exampl
On 2/10/16 12:15 PM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
to follow your talk at nedev11, I already proposed some times ago a
patch to
remove sysctl, which was rejected. You can see the thread here:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/285840
Thanks for the reference. I'll take a look.
Instead of r
David, Roopa,
to follow your talk at nedev11, I already proposed some times ago a patch to
remove sysctl, which was rejected. You can see the thread here:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/285840
Instead of removing completly the sysctl entries, another idea could be to
manage a group
