On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:28:13 -0600
Olof Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I noticed this when looking at an openswan issue. Openswan (ab?)uses
> the tasklet API to defer processing of packets in some situations,
> with one packet per tasklet_action(). I started noticing sequences of
>
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:28:13 -0600
Olof Johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I noticed this when looking at an openswan issue. Openswan (ab?)uses
the tasklet API to defer processing of packets in some situations,
with one packet per tasklet_action(). I started noticing sequences of
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:28:13 -0600
Olof Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I noticed this when looking at an openswan issue. Openswan (ab?)uses
> the tasklet API to defer processing of packets in some situations,
> with one packet per tasklet_action(). I started noticing sequences of
>
I noticed this when looking at an openswan issue. Openswan (ab?)uses
the tasklet API to defer processing of packets in some situations,
with one packet per tasklet_action(). I started noticing sequences of
reverse-ordered sequence numbers coming over the wire, since new tasklets
are always queued
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:28:13 -0600
Olof Johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I noticed this when looking at an openswan issue. Openswan (ab?)uses
the tasklet API to defer processing of packets in some situations,
with one packet per tasklet_action(). I started noticing sequences of
I noticed this when looking at an openswan issue. Openswan (ab?)uses
the tasklet API to defer processing of packets in some situations,
with one packet per tasklet_action(). I started noticing sequences of
reverse-ordered sequence numbers coming over the wire, since new tasklets
are always queued
6 matches
Mail list logo