[Top] [All Lists]

Re: RFC: IPSEC patch 0 for netlink events

To: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: RFC: IPSEC patch 0 for netlink events
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:32:55 +1000
Cc: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>, Masahide NAKAMURA <nakam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <>
References: <1111864971.1092.904.camel@jzny.localdomain> <> <1111867875.1089.915.camel@jzny.localdomain> <> <1111950449.1089.938.camel@jzny.localdomain> <> <1112184572.1089.80.camel@jzny.localdomain> <>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 10:23:21PM +1000, herbert wrote:
> For netlink it is important to use a different socket for receiving
> multicast messages since otherwise you run the risk of losing unicast
> messages when it overruns.

This would work for PFKEY too since if we did this, we can simply
remove the BROADCAST_ONE messages from the pfkey_* functions.
Visit Openswan at
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Home Page:
PGP Key:

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