| To: | Stefan Rompf <srompf@xxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Patch: Device operative state notification against 2.5.7 |
| From: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 7 Apr 2002 16:26:53 -0400 (EDT) |
| Cc: | <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.GSO.4.30.0204071538220.12041-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, jamal wrote: > The only useful state transitions are to/from IFOP_DOWN_NOCARRIER > in my opinion. What do you think? I meant this view from a "listener" perspective; example from an SNMP NMS perspective or even a dynamic route daemon, this is the only really interesting state transition. So IMO, it only makes sense to send netlink messages for these. cheers, jamal |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Patch: Device operative state notification against 2.5.7, jamal |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [HELP] kernel_thread, Yon Uriarte |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Patch: Device operative state notification against 2.5.7, jamal |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Patch: Device operative state notification against 2.5.7, David Brownell |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |