From: Dan Cross <cross@math.psu.edu>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Speaking of routing....
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 18:46:50 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200302132346.h1DNkoM24181@augusta.math.psu.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 13 Feb 2003 18:24:10 EST." <2dfe988b9b04784bc0e9914296e4e74d@plan9.bell-labs.com>
> > I guess it's the 30-second timeout-tax I'm bummed out about. I guess
> > I don't see why, if I don't have a default route on the IP stack, it
> > would take 30 seconds to realize that sending a packet out of that stack
> > wasn't going to work.
>
> Generally how it should work is that name resolution fails on
> /net/cs, and dial moves on to /net.alt without having to time
> out. This depends on you having ndb/cs set up right (one
> for each interface with its own ndb file) and also ndb/dns for
> DNS. Of course, if you're using numeric IP addresses you'll
> get the timeout (unless you give /net.alt explicitly).
No, everything is using hostnames; perhaps it'll work. I really need
to power everything up (the whole shebang is currently under my
girlfriend's bed in her apartment, and annoys her when she tries to
sleep; hence frequent power-downs) and test it for real, instead of
stabbing in the dark.
I would imagine that the IP stack would be smart enough, if it got a
packet destined for the outside network (for which it would have no
routes on the internal network) to say immediately, ``I don't know what
to do with this!'' and return an error, prompting dial() to proceed to
/net.alt without a perceptable delay. Am I wrong?
It also occurs to me that for smtp, I can do bind's in upas's scripts
that go immediately to /net.alt, since no SMTP traffic will ever be
sent on the internal network.
- Dan C.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-02-13 23:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20030213095533.L50666@ >
2003-02-13 22:16 ` Dan Cross
2003-02-13 22:24 ` andrey mirtchovski
2003-02-13 22:27 ` David Gordon Hogan
2003-02-13 23:14 ` Dan Cross
2003-02-13 23:23 ` northern snowfall
2003-02-13 23:24 ` David Gordon Hogan
2003-02-13 23:46 ` Dan Cross [this message]
2003-02-14 0:11 ` Russ Cox
2003-02-14 0:17 ` Dan Cross
2003-02-14 0:21 ` David Presotto
2003-02-14 0:29 ` northern snowfall
2003-02-14 16:40 ` [9fans] FS dimension northern snowfall
2003-02-14 0:31 ` [9fans] Speaking of routing Dan Cross
2003-02-14 0:34 ` David Presotto
2003-02-14 0:32 ` David Presotto
2003-02-14 0:44 ` Dan Cross
2003-02-14 0:48 ` David Presotto
2003-02-14 0:50 ` Dan Cross
2003-02-14 0:52 ` David Presotto
2003-02-14 0:57 ` Dan Cross
2003-02-13 16:52 Dan Cross
2003-02-13 17:03 ` andrey mirtchovski
2003-02-13 17:13 ` Skip Tavakkolian
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200302132346.h1DNkoM24181@augusta.math.psu.edu \
--to=cross@math.psu.edu \
--cc=9fans@cse.psu.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).