| To: | Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Patch resubmission: RFC2863 operstatus for 2.5.50 |
| From: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 4 Dec 2002 08:11:27 -0500 (EST) |
| Cc: | Stefan Rompf <srompf@xxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <3DED51E9.1080408@pobox.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Pardon my dumb question, but what parts of RFC2863 require kernel > additions over and above your link state patch? > > Your second patch I am less enthusiastic about than the first... :( > > I wonder if userspace cannot figure out ifOperStatus from existing data > we make available? > Stefans curtrent patch makes the info available via netlink. What dont you like about it Jeff? Take a quick look at RFC2863 and scan for IfAdminStatus and IfOperStatus. The modelling RFC2863 has is pretty good and thats what Stefan has followed (after we weeded a few crappy pieces off the RFC; we discussed on netdev). cheers, jamal |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Patch resubmission: RFC2863 operstatus for 2.5.49, jamal |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: tcp flows hash function, jamal |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Patch resubmission: RFC2863 operstatus for 2.5.50, Jeff Garzik |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Patch resubmission: RFC2863 operstatus for 2.5.50, Jeff Garzik |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |