> What about the idea of dealing with this at a later date, when it > actually shows up as a problem?
Waiting for problems to bite us in the field seems unfortunate. > I can certainly address it now, but it adds a lot of complexity, and it > doesn't really *solve* the problem. > (Because you still wind up with a 250K limit.) Indeed, I'd say what we have right now is also a bug. I can understand (based on inherent limits in the dev_t) why a given device could only have a certain number of open instances, but the only global limit I'd expect on the number of open instances would be memory. -- meem _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
