> On 11/1/17 3:07 PM, Frank Filz wrote:
> > I think we only need a single call fired off. If the client doesn't get it,
> > there's
> not much recourse. I guess if a TCP connection actually fails, we could retry
> then, but over UDP there is no way to know what happened.
> >
> > Thanks for worki
On 11/1/17 3:07 PM, Frank Filz wrote:
I think we only need a single call fired off. If the client doesn't get it,
there's not much recourse. I guess if a TCP connection actually fails, we could
retry then, but over UDP there is no way to know what happened.
Thanks for working on cleaning this
> On 11/1/17 10:07 AM, Frank Filz wrote:
> > So part of why that code looks bizarre? Because the NLM ASYNC RPC
> > procedures are bizarre...
> >
> > The NLM ASYNC procedures DON'T have a normal RPC call response.
> > Instead, the host handling the call (normally the server, but the
> > client in th
On 11/1/17 2:27 PM, William Allen Simpson wrote:
On 11/1/17 10:07 AM, Frank Filz wrote:
So part of why that code looks bizarre? Because the NLM ASYNC RPC procedures
are bizarre...
The NLM ASYNC procedures DON'T have a normal RPC call response. Instead, the
host handling the call (normally the s
On 11/1/17 10:07 AM, Frank Filz wrote:
So part of why that code looks bizarre? Because the NLM ASYNC RPC procedures
are bizarre...
The NLM ASYNC procedures DON'T have a normal RPC call response. Instead, the
host handling the call (normally the server, but the client in the case of
NLM_GRANTED f
> A few people know this code. One is Frank. I don't immediately see the
> reason for strong concern, feel free to improve.
So part of why that code looks bizarre? Because the NLM ASYNC RPC procedures
are bizarre...
The NLM ASYNC procedures DON'T have a normal RPC call response. Instead, the
ho
A few people know this code. One is Frank. I don't immediately see
the reason for strong concern, feel free to improve.
Matt
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 5:20 AM, William Allen Simpson
wrote:
> I'm flummoxed. Who knows this code?
>
> Problem 1: the timeout is set to 10 microseconds. Holy heck? An
I'm flummoxed. Who knows this code?
Problem 1: the timeout is set to 10 microseconds. Holy heck? And
historically, that's the maximum total wait time, so it would try at
least three (3) times within 10 *MICRO*seconds?
Probably should be milliseconds.
Problem 2: there's a retry loop that sets