| To: | Gleb Natapov <gleb@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ??? |
| From: | Jes Sorensen <jes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | 12 Jun 2000 16:31:07 +0200 |
| Cc: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Mitchell Blank Jr <mitch@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andrey Savochkin <saw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, rob@xxxxxxxxxxx, buytenh@xxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | Gleb Natapov's message of "Mon, 12 Jun 2000 12:54:00 +0000" |
| References: | <Pine.GSO.4.20.0006120739590.1773-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3944DD68.3AB7DDEB@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Gnus/5.070096 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.96) Emacs/20.4 |
>>>>> "Gleb" == Gleb Natapov <gleb@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: Gleb> Answer me this question: are you going to change something in Gleb> net/ipv4/ directory in your VLAN implementation? Gleb> If answer is yes, you implementation is broken IMO. If answer Gleb> is no, I really want to see your code. There is *nothing* wrong with having to change code in say the ipv4 directory if that provides a better solution. Trying to avoid code changes is not a goal in itself - the target for Linux is not to avoid changing code but to provide the best solution. Jes |
| Previous by Date: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ???, Jes Sorensen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Linux 2.4 IPv6 Problem, Behcet Sarikaya |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ???, Gleb Natapov |
| Next by Thread: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ???, jamal |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |