unnecessary and frequency kernel routing update

[Ondrej Zajicek]

On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 11:57:56PM +0400, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
> Why? protocol kernel know about current route. If this route don't
> changed (same next hop, weight if support, etc) -- don't propagate
> this update to kernel.

I thought about more generic flap damping solution, your suggestion
for ignoring irrelevant kernel updates is fine and could be easily
done.

> > Well, for OSPF such problem cannot happen, as OSPF recalculates routes
> > at most once per second.
> 
> uhhh. What about support OSPF sub-second timers?

Well, we should move from second-based timers to something more
fine-grained.

-- 
Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo

Ondrej 'SanTiago' Zajicek (email: santiago at crfreenet.org)
OpenPGP encrypted e-mails preferred (KeyID 0x11DEADC3, wwwkeys.pgp.net)
"To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://trubka.network.cz/pipermail/bird-users/attachments/20130502/1bfe1531/attachment-0001.asc>