Technically I agree with leaving the UDP buffers alone (unless they are
explicitly set in the configuration) like you suggest.
However, the consequences will be that more traps will get lost and bigger
packets might not make it when people upgrade to version 5.2, just because
their OS default happens to be smaller than our originally hardcoded 128K.

Not a problem for me at all, but definitely not easy to debug as an enduser
why traps are lost "with this new version".

What is the "upgrade/backward compatibility" strategy for the net-snmp
project ?

If such a change in operational behaviour is acceptable, then I'm all for
it.

-- Geert



-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Story (Coders) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Sunday, October 03, 2004 4:21 PM
To: Geert De Peuter
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Geert De Peuter'; 'John Naylon'
Subject: Re: default sock buffer size: what should it be?


On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 10:07:25 +0200 Geert wrote:
GDP> In case someone has a default socket buffer size which is greater 
GDP> than our default (currently 128K) then we should probably respect 
GDP> that.

I think this is another good argument for leaving the OS default alone,
unless a buffer size is explicitly set in the conf files (or at application
startup).


GDP> This leaves an OS buffer which is bigger than the DEFAULT_BUFFER 
GDP> untouched.

Except that it is conceivable that and application actually wants a smaller
buffer size that the default.

-- 
Robert Story; NET-SNMP Junkie <http://www.net-snmp.org/>
<irc://irc.freenode.net/#net-snmp>
Archive:
<http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=net-snmp-coders>

You are lost in a twisty maze of little standards, all different. 



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal
Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us
Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more
http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders

Reply via email to