netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH, TAKE 2] [IPV6] XFRM: extract xfrm_lookup() from ip6_dst_look

To: Brian.Haley@xxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH, TAKE 2] [IPV6] XFRM: extract xfrm_lookup() from ip6_dst_lookup() (is Re: [PATCH][IPv6] separation xfrm_lookup from ip6_dst_lookup)
From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 00:43:59 +0900 (JST)
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <417E5F37.4010501@xxxxxx>
Organization: USAGI Project
References: <417D6FD0.7010903@xxxxxx> <20041026.125539.84990576.yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <417E5F37.4010501@xxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
In article <417E5F37.4010501@xxxxxx> (at Tue, 26 Oct 2004 10:29:11 -0400), 
Brian Haley <Brian.Haley@xxxxxx> says:

> >>Attached is a patch that fixes that and also brings the rt0_hdr struct 
> >>in-line with RFC 3542 by removing the "bitmap" field.
> > 
> > Good catch but please do not change bitmap.
> 
> I understand that was more cosmetic since it's a kernel header, but can
> you explain it any further?  I couldn't find any other occurences than 
> those I fixed.  The user-space version in netinet/ip6.h is even more 
> broken and I'm pushing that to the glibc people now too.

First, in general, please do not mix two things.

Second, because we're not ready to migrate.
Please do not do that (pushing it to the glibc people) until we're ready.
We really need to do in consistent way; kernel header / glibc header,
and even with other systems.

--yoshfuji

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