| To: | xma@xxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] IPv6 MIB:ipv6RouterAdvert netlink notification |
| From: | YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sat, 17 Jan 2004 04:17:25 +0900 (JST) |
| Cc: | davem@xxxxxxxxxx, mashirle@xxxxxxxxxx, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <OFDFE3736C.20FD7F98-ON87256E1D.00662F80@us.ibm.com> |
| Organization: | USAGI Project |
| References: | <OFDFE3736C.20FD7F98-ON87256E1D.00662F80@us.ibm.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
In article <OFDFE3736C.20FD7F98-ON87256E1D.00662F80@xxxxxxxxxx> (at Fri, 16 Jan 2004 10:38:49 -0800), Shirley Ma <xma@xxxxxxxxxx> says: > But the patch is still needed for the Router, so it should be put in > ndisc_router_discovery() when it's determined as a router. Are you OK with > that? I don't understand why it is needed. radvd is respoinsible for those information. -- Hideaki YOSHIFUJI @ USAGI Project <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> GPG FP: 9022 65EB 1ECF 3AD1 0BDF 80D8 4807 F894 E062 0EEA |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Stale Filehandles was: [2.6] nfs_rename: target $file busy, d_count=2, Mike Fedyk |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Fw: Oops in register_proc_table (2.6.1-mm4), Andrew Morton |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] IPv6 MIB:ipv6RouterAdvert netlink notification, Shirley Ma |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] IPv6 MIB:ipv6RouterAdvert netlink notification, Shirley Ma |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |