[quagga-dev 12082] Re: Advise on implementation
ddutt at cumulusnetworks.com
Tue Mar 3 15:31:54 GMT 2015
+1, plus the issue that the various daemons may no longer be isolated from
each other due to this shm,
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Greg Troxel <gdt at ir.bbn.com> wrote:
> My basic opinion is that shm interfaces end up being painful for various
> reasons, including portability but also leaving shm segments around.
> Since this is control plane, and sockets are fast anyway, I don't see
> any reason to get wrapped up in shm.
> Quagga-dev mailing list
> Quagga-dev at lists.quagga.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Quagga-dev