| To: | yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明) |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] IPv6: Improvement of Source Address Selection |
| From: | kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Date: | Sat, 28 Sep 2002 09:26:57 +0400 (MSD) |
| Cc: | usagi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, davem@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20020928.141407.110833680.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> from "YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明" at Sep 28, 2 02:14:07 pm |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Hello! > we need per application (per socket) interface > for privacy extension (public address vs temporary address) and > mobile ip (home address vs care-of address). OK. It is natural user-friendly generalization of bind(). I do not see problems. Though, please, explain, to avoid misunderstanding. Let's take the second case for simplicity. Is that true that it is supposed to add to each application a switch "home or care-of"? This sound strange enough, taking into account that only a few of applications have switch sort of -b in openssh despite of age of plain bind() is equal to age of internet. :-) Alexey |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] IPv6: Improvement of Source Address Selection, Pekka Savola |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] IPv6: Improvement of Source Address Selection, kuznet |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] IPv6: Improvement of Source Address Selection, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] IPv6: Improvement of Source Address Selection, Pekka Savola |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |