netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 1/4] Prefix List against 2.5.73

To: yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (YOSHIFUJIHideaki/吉藤英明)
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] Prefix List against 2.5.73
From: kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 17:20:30 +0400 (MSD)
Cc: krkumar@xxxxxxxxxx, davem@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20030715.155930.65250697.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> from "YOSHIFUJIHideaki/吉藤英明" at 15, 2003 03:59:30
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
Hello!

> > > + IFA_IFFLAGS,
> > 
> > What's about ifa_flags? There is some space there, and the things
> > kept there now: TENTATIVE/DEPRECATED et al. are close relatives
> > of O/M.
> 
> Alexey, O/M are not flags for addresses, but for interfaces.
> I believe we should not mix them up.

OK.

But tell me, please, what is the difference between new _address_
attribute IFA_IFFLAGS and already existing address attrbute ifa_flags?
If you are going to enclose these per-interface flags to address information,
they can be enclosed within existing attrubute.

Alexey

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>