| To: | Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [IPSEC] Add XFRMA_SA/XFRMA_POLICY for delete notification |
| From: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 27 May 2005 20:30:42 -0400 |
| Cc: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20050527233741.GA9157@gondor.apana.org.au> |
| Organization: | unknown |
| References: | <20050527233741.GA9157@gondor.apana.org.au> |
| Reply-to: | hadi@xxxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Sat, 2005-28-05 at 09:37 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > Hi Dave: > > This is the patch that I reverted due to Jamal's objection to it. > I still think it's the right way to go which is why I'm submitting > it. As it is, all the xfrm event notifications sent by the kernel > except the ones for SA/policy deletion are symmetric in the sense > that if they were sent straight back to the kernel in that same > form they would be accepted and perform the same action that > triggered the initial events. As far as I know this is true for > non-xfrm netlink notifications as well, including deletion events. > I have no objection to this patch going forth. I think i have sufficiently expressed my dislike - but we gotta make progress;-> cheers, jamal |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [0/10] [IPSEC] IPsec event notification, Herbert Xu |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch, jamal |
| Previous by Thread: | [IPSEC] Add XFRMA_SA/XFRMA_POLICY for delete notification, Herbert Xu |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [IPSEC] Add XFRMA_SA/XFRMA_POLICY for delete notification, David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |