On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:30:51AM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> On 12/07/13(Fri) 11:35, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > As it was pointed out by dhill there are some rogue splnets in
> > the tcp_input that shouldn't be there really. The only reason
> > they're still there is to match ove
On 12/07/13(Fri) 11:35, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As it was pointed out by dhill there are some rogue splnets in
> the tcp_input that shouldn't be there really. The only reason
> they're still there is to match overzealous splnets in bridge_
> broadcast. bridge_ifenqueue is the only functi
Hi,
As it was pointed out by dhill there are some rogue splnets in
the tcp_input that shouldn't be there really. The only reason
they're still there is to match overzealous splnets in bridge_
broadcast. bridge_ifenqueue is the only function call in there
that requires splnet protection since it'
