| To: | Pekka Savola <pekkas@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH][RFC] etherip: Ethernet-in-IPv4 tunneling |
| From: | Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:23:51 +0100 |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, shemminger@xxxxxxxx, shollenbeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.61.0501130944270.19573@netcore.fi> |
| References: | <20050112222437.GC14280@xi.wantstofly.org> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0501130944270.19573@netcore.fi> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4.1i |
On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 09:49:55AM +0200, Pekka Savola wrote: > Is there a particular reason why GRE tunnel is not sufficient? No particular reason, apart from not being aware that GRE provides this functionality. cheers, Lennert |
| Previous by Date: | Re: V2.4 policy router operates faster/better than V2.6, Robert Olsson |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [RFC] Patch to Abstract Ethernet PHY support (using driver model), Kumar Gala |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH][RFC] etherip: Ethernet-in-IPv4 tunneling, Pekka Savola |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH][RFC] etherip: Ethernet-in-IPv4 tunneling, jamal |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |