[PATCH] Remove simple KCC code
metze at samba.org
Thu Feb 2 11:44:29 UTC 2017
> At the very least, I think the distinction between the old KCC and the
> unused KCC code needs to be clear.
> These two files I believe run the full mesh:
> While the other files serve don't have any purpose (as an attempt at the
> proper KCC algorithm in C), they should have no genuine side-effects and
> are completely untested (and I know to be significantly incorrect, so
> was not very useful as a reference guide for the python KCC).
Yes, unused code should be removed.
> I have no objections at all to removing the latter code, but that should
> be done separately from the other code.
> Just to highlight what I would expect the difference between the default
> behaviour between the old KCC and the new KCC:
> - With a single site, you would have a double ring in the new KCC vs a
> fully connected network
> - With multiple sites, if they are incorrectly configured, the old KCC
> would effectively ignore that. It also connected across sites and
> disregards any topology, hitting firewalls and such.
> - RODC would always stay online (however they are abusing their current
> read-write access to the database *feature*)
> - The new KCC probably takes longer to converge to the final
> connectivity graph
> Where you only have a few DCs, I think the old KCC still possibly makes
> more sense (although there's no reason why we can't do get that
> behaviour to work in the new KCC code). But I would like to know if
> there are any setups that actually don't work under the new KCC.
See my previous mail to Andrew.
I believe you that the new kcc produces good results when you setup
a complete new domain with a configuration you want (the hub style
But I got very strange results for existing installations
and I was not able to debug them in a few hours time.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the samba-technical