| To: | <kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Patch: Idea for RFC2863 conform OperStatus |
| From: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 13 Oct 2002 16:30:34 -0400 (EDT) |
| Cc: | <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <200210131914.XAA09216@sex.inr.ac.ru> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Look at RFC 2863 section 3.1.12; there is some description on operational status. At the moment the only status is IFF_RUNNING in the ifi_flags. So the question was could we use ifi_change to send the other pieces of info (as per RFC 2863) and as implemented in Stefans patch? If not, could we take advantage of that pad in the ifinfomsg? This should not break any backward compatibility. cheers, jamal On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Hello! > > > How about making use of ifi_change to extend them? Alexey, would this be > > proper use of ifi_change? > > I did not understand the question. > > Alexey > |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Patch: Idea for RFC2863 conform OperStatus, kuznet |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Patch: Idea for RFC2863 conform OperStatus, kuznet |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Patch: Idea for RFC2863 conform OperStatus, kuznet |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Patch: Idea for RFC2863 conform OperStatus, kuznet |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |