| To: | ajtuomin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.43 |
| From: | YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 01 Nov 2002 12:27:58 +0900 (JST) |
| Cc: | takamiya@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, davem@xxxxxxxxxx, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, pekkas@xxxxxxxxxx, torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, jagana@xxxxxxxxxx, yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20021031104146.GA18786@morphine.tml.hut.fi> |
| Organization: | USAGI Project |
| References: | <20021017162624.GC16370@morphine.tml.hut.fi> <20021031.174442.846937513.takamiya@po.ntts.co.jp> <20021031104146.GA18786@morphine.tml.hut.fi> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
In article <20021031104146.GA18786@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (at Thu, 31 Oct 2002 12:41:46 +0200), Antti Tuominen <ajtuomin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> says: > > (4) Processing Mobility Header > > How about using ip6_txoptions and hdrproc_lst? > > Because Mobility header is an extension header, we think it is > > reasonable way to handle it in ipv6_parse_exthdrs(). > > No. We did this back in Draft 15, when all the mobility stuff was > destination options. Mobility Header is not an extension header, but > rather a final protocol. Only Home Address Option is an extension > header and is handled in ipv6/exthdrs.c. What is the problem with > this? This is not so strong request here at this moment. --yoshfuji |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.43, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Fw: Mis Fotos (solo adultos), mis_fotos_privadas_mirror |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.43, Antti Tuominen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.43, Henrik Petander |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |