Re: [Babel-users] some thoughts towards babel-1.9

2017-01-03 Thread Dave Taht
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: >> Well, the rabel repo exists for the crazy ideas... and unfortunately >> testing them at scale tends towards being a PITA. > > Exactly my point. Ideas are cheap. > > -- Juliusz Ideas are not cheap. Most people have few of them. I avera

Re: [Babel-users] some thoughts towards babel-1.9

2017-01-03 Thread Juliusz Chroboczek
> Well, the rabel repo exists for the crazy ideas... and unfortunately > testing them at scale tends towards being a PITA. Exactly my point. Ideas are cheap. -- Juliusz ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alio

Re: [Babel-users] some thoughts towards babel-1.9

2017-01-02 Thread Dave Taht
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 4:21 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: >> If that is the only error in two highly speculative documents then I'm >> winning. :) > > You'll be helpful (I prefer this to "winning") when you implement some of > your ideas and provide us with hard data to show that they are useful.

Re: [Babel-users] some thoughts towards babel-1.9

2017-01-02 Thread Juliusz Chroboczek
> If that is the only error in two highly speculative documents then I'm > winning. :) You'll be helpful (I prefer this to "winning") when you implement some of your ideas and provide us with hard data to show that they are useful. (For the record, CS6 and unicast IHU have both been implemented,

Re: [Babel-users] some thoughts towards babel-1.9

2017-01-02 Thread Dave Taht
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: >> For the wired link case, I am surprised babel considers it "interfering"! > > It doesn't. > > https://github.com/jech/babeld/blob/master/interface.c#L210 If that is the only error in two highly speculative documents then I'm winning.

Re: [Babel-users] some thoughts towards babel-1.9

2017-01-02 Thread Juliusz Chroboczek
> For the wired link case, I am surprised babel considers it "interfering"! It doesn't. https://github.com/jech/babeld/blob/master/interface.c#L210 ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bi

Re: [Babel-users] some thoughts towards babel-1.9

2017-01-02 Thread Dave Taht
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 6:28 AM, Benjamin Henrion wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 6:25 PM, Dave Taht wrote: >> I've long been testing a few out of tree patches for babel and long >> have had the intent to try a few more once the first phase of the >> make-wifi-fast work was completed - which it m

Re: [Babel-users] some thoughts towards babel-1.9

2017-01-02 Thread Benjamin Henrion
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Benjamin Henrion wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 6:25 PM, Dave Taht wrote: >> I've long been testing a few out of tree patches for babel and long >> have had the intent to try a few more once the first phase of the >> make-wifi-fast work was completed - which it m

Re: [Babel-users] some thoughts towards babel-1.9

2017-01-02 Thread Benjamin Henrion
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 6:25 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > I've long been testing a few out of tree patches for babel and long > have had the intent to try a few more once the first phase of the > make-wifi-fast work was completed - which it mostly is, so far as lede > is concerned ( https://lwn.net/Arti

Re: [Babel-users] some thoughts towards babel-1.9

2016-12-12 Thread David Schinazi
Dave, Thanks for writing this up, it's an interesting read. I agree with you on the topic of multicast. My implementation sends everything unicast, with the exception of Hellos. I'm interested in working on a way to allow unicast Hellos. I read your thoughts here: https://github.com/dtaht/rabeld/b

[Babel-users] some thoughts towards babel-1.9

2016-12-12 Thread Dave Taht
I've long been testing a few out of tree patches for babel and long have had the intent to try a few more once the first phase of the make-wifi-fast work was completed - which it mostly is, so far as lede is concerned ( https://lwn.net/Articles/705884/ ) - and babel-1.8 stablized. I wrote up some