| To: | Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH][RFC] etherip: Ethernet-in-IPv4 tunneling |
| From: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | 16 Jan 2005 12:37:00 -0500 |
| Cc: | Pekka Savola <pekkas@xxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, shemminger@xxxxxxxx, shollenbeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20050113092351.GA23170@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Organization: | jamalopolous |
| References: | <20050112222437.GC14280@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0501130944270.19573@xxxxxxxxxx> <20050113092351.GA23170@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | hadi@xxxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Thu, 2005-01-13 at 04:23, Lennert Buytenhek wrote: > On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 09:49:55AM +0200, Pekka Savola wrote: > > > Is there a particular reason why GRE tunnel is not sufficient? > > No particular reason, apart from not being aware that GRE provides > this functionality. True that GRE can do all this (and they have thought out well the broadcasting etc) but i dont think it will harm to push this into the kernel if some odd OS like openbsd supports it. cheers, jamal |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] remove superfluous diverter printk'ing, jamal |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Iproute2: update, Jamal Hadi Salim |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH][RFC] etherip: Ethernet-in-IPv4 tunneling, Lennert Buytenhek |
| Next by Thread: | tunneling in linux (was: Re: [PATCH][RFC] etherip: Ethernet-in-IPv4 tunneling), Lennert Buytenhek |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |