On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 11:35 -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 10:57 -0500, Darren Albers wrote:
> > > I have had other bug reports that users need DHCP timeouts in the 30~40
> > > second range. To be sure, most ifup scripts wait longer than 25s.
> > >
> >
> > I think a timeout in the 30-40 second range would also resolve the
> > issues with portfast...
>
> 45 or so is generally what's claimed. But this isn't a good answer for
> spanning tree -- it means if you really don't have dhcp on your network,
> we're punishing you by making you wait extra long for before falling
> back to other methods.
So, at 25s now, we are nearly 50% off.
Dan, what do you say to bumping the timeout to 40 or 45?
Robert Love
_______________________________________________
NetworkManager-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
