svn commit: r280759 - head/sys/netinet

[Slawa Olhovchenkov]

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 11:22:16PM -0400, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 9:15 PM, John-Mark Gurney <jmg at funkthat.com> wrote:
> 
> > Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote this message on Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 00:34 +0300:
> > > On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 01:43:33PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
> > >
> > > In this case may be do range allocation of ID (per-CPU)?
> > > For example, allocate 128 ID, not one ID?
> >
> > Do you mean what to do in the case of an atomic packet?
> >
> > Per RFC:
> >    In atomic datagrams, the IPv4 ID field has no meaning; thus, it can
> >    be set to an arbitrary value, i.e., the requirement for non-repeating
> >    IDs within the source address/destination address/protocol tuple is
> >    no longer required for atomic datagrams:
> >
> > You can just set it to 0, or any value we feel like.
> >
> 
> My reading was to give each CPU its own range from which to allocate IDs,
> to guarantee that there are no collisions between CPUs.

Yes.