Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCHSET\]\s+Mobile\s+IPv6\s+for\s+2\.5\.45\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCHSET\]\s+Mobile\s+IPv6\s+for\s+2\.5\.45\s*$/: 24 ]

Total 24 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 (score: 1): Author: "Venkata Jagana" <jagana@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 22:51:13 -0800; I believe even the registration part should belong to kernel and here are the reasons why. The Home Agent needs to consult the Binding Cache, which is stored upon successful completion of Binding up; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00000.html (8,685 bytes)
2. Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 02:37:18 -0800 (PST); I believe even the registration part should belong to kernel and here are the reasons why. The Home Agent needs to ... None of the things you've listed make it desirable to put the home agent registr; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00005.html (9,516 bytes)
3. Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 16:32:13 -0800; Hello Dave, I absolutely understand your concerns about keeping the Home Agent registration in the kernel. However, I still believe that keeping this code in userspace would cause problems for handof; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00008.html (9,915 bytes)
4. Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 17:15:09 -0800; Hi Dave, I had a couple of comments about putting the registration part in userspace. When the HA gets a registration request, it needs to perform the following actions : 1. perform DAD 2. get the li; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00009.html (9,826 bytes)
5. Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2002 12:00:19 +0900 (JST); 1: True: we need some interface (and small code) 2: FALSE: you CAN listen icmp6 message via raw socket. 3: FALSE: you CAN create tunnel using raw socket; however, we think this is implemented in kern; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00010.html (10,715 bytes)
6. Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2002 03:23:53 -0500; Krishna Kumar wrote: Hi Dave, None of the things you've listed make it desirable to put the home agent registration into the kernel. All of the operations you describe could be invoked by the userlan; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00011.html (10,896 bytes)
7. Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 (score: 1): Author: rzik@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 10:36:09 +0200 (EET); I believe there could be more hooks in the kernel to let userspace do certain tasks, for example, sending router solicitations and processing the responses -- sure, this can be done in the userspace; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00012.html (11,415 bytes)
8. 娾€婚浕瀛愩儭銉笺儷搴冨憡 (score: 1): Author: xxx@oss.sgi.com; Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 13:13:22 -0800; I agree with Pekka, hence the response to Jeff's and Yoshifuji's mail is the same - what you are suggestting is feasible but we need more work in the kernel either way. We can do many/most of these t; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00015.html (13,505 bytes)
9. T] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 (score: 1): Author: rkr@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 23:23:08 -0300; [ Cc: trimmed ] They die, as they should. So what makes the home agent so much more important than, say, named, pppd, gated, portmap, inetd, sendmail, sshd, etc. ? A much more common admin mistake wo; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00016.html (9,145 bytes)
10. te packet & wanpipe ioctl routines (score: 1): Author: 槑 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 18:19:21 -0800 (PST); fferent things): - default route failover. You configured it. It doesn't do any load b; /archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00605.html (14,243 bytes)
11. (score: 1): Author: UJI Hideaki / 鍚夎棨鑻辨槑 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 18:17:08 -0800 (PST); n information. -- Hosting you can count on. E-Computer Support can make it easy to swi; /archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00606.html (7,721 bytes)
12. version 2 (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 11:36:12 +0900 (JST); ess to say I belive this is a big problem. That's because about all firewalls/packet filters except Linux (possibly due to the fact that there is no "established" except in full stateful matchi; /archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00607.html (8,350 bytes)
13. Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 (score: 1): Author: "Venkata Jagana" <jagana@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 22:51:13 -0800; I believe even the registration part should belong to kernel and here are the reasons why. The Home Agent needs to consult the Binding Cache, which is stored upon successful completion of Binding up; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00218.html (8,685 bytes)
14. Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 (score: 1): Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 02:37:18 -0800 (PST); I believe even the registration part should belong to kernel and here are the reasons why. The Home Agent needs to ... None of the things you've listed make it desirable to put the home agent registr; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00223.html (9,610 bytes)
15. Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 (score: 1): Author: "Venkata Jagana" <jagana@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 16:32:13 -0800; Hello Dave, I absolutely understand your concerns about keeping the Home Agent registration in the kernel. However, I still believe that keeping this code in userspace would cause problems for handof; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00226.html (9,915 bytes)
16. Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 (score: 1): Author: "Krishna Kumar" <kumarkr@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 17:15:09 -0800; Hi Dave, I had a couple of comments about putting the registration part in userspace. When the HA gets a registration request, it needs to perform the following actions : 1. perform DAD 2. get the li; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00227.html (9,826 bytes)
17. Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 (score: 1): Author: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2002 12:00:19 +0900 (JST); 1: True: we need some interface (and small code) 2: FALSE: you CAN listen icmp6 message via raw socket. 3: FALSE: you CAN create tunnel using raw socket; however, we think this is implemented in kern; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00228.html (10,809 bytes)
18. Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 (score: 1): Author: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2002 03:23:53 -0500; Hi Dave, None of the things you've listed make it desirable to put the home agent registration into the kernel. All of the operations you describe could be invoked by the userland home agent daemon; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00229.html (10,913 bytes)
19. Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 (score: 1): Author: Pekka Savola <pekkas@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 10:36:09 +0200 (EET); I believe there could be more hooks in the kernel to let userspace do certain tasks, for example, sending router solicitations and processing the responses -- sure, this can be done in the userspace; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00230.html (11,456 bytes)
20. Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 (score: 1): Author: "Krishna Kumar" <kumarkr@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 13:13:22 -0800; I agree with Pekka, hence the response to Jeff's and Yoshifuji's mail is the same - what you are suggestting is feasible but we need more work in the kernel either way. We can do many/most of these t; /archives/netdev/2002-11/msg00233.html (11,539 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]