Martin Pieuchot(m...@openbsd.org) on 2016.06.08 20:50:29 +0200:
> On 08/06/16(Wed) 19:51, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
> > [...]
> > i dont see why this would be a problem
> >
> > however:
> >
> > + ... if we were going to use
> > +* the last available route, but it got remo
On 08/06/16(Wed) 19:51, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
> [...]
> i dont see why this would be a problem
>
> however:
>
> + ... if we were going to use
> +* the last available route, but it got removed, we'll hit
> +* the end of the list and then pick the firs
Jonathan Matthew(jonat...@d14n.org) on 2016.06.06 17:14:53 +1000:
> We've finally got srp and art to the point where we can use srp to manage the
> internal links in the art data structures. This allows us to do route lookups
> without holding any locks, which is kind of nice.
>
> As we're not do
On 06/06/16(Mon) 17:14, Jonathan Matthew wrote:
> We've finally got srp and art to the point where we can use srp to manage the
> internal links in the art data structures. This allows us to do route lookups
> without holding any locks, which is kind of nice.
It's awesome!
> As we're not doing u
> On 6 Jun 2016, at 17:14, Jonathan Matthew wrote:
>
> We've finally got srp and art to the point where we can use srp to manage the
> internal links in the art data structures. This allows us to do route lookups
> without holding any locks, which is kind of nice.
>
> As we're not doing unlock
We've finally got srp and art to the point where we can use srp to manage the
internal links in the art data structures. This allows us to do route lookups
without holding any locks, which is kind of nice.
As we're not doing unlocked insert, delete or walk (yet), those art functions
use the locke
