On Tue, 2007-23-10 at 16:08 +0900, Masahide NAKAMURA wrote: > Thanks. I would like you to find too much item at my patch > for the statistics, too.
I am not anywhere close to a machine where i can give you precise details to this; the one thing that sticks out in my brain cells is the SPI mismatch. This (in static setups) seemed to be the most common mistake i saw (other than a mismatched key). Your stats as you have them now and as is will catch both in one spot - which is a good start. > This point is one of what I want to hear comment. > My patch uses "XFRM_MIB_XXX" because I found "LINUX_MIB_XXX" definition at > include/linux/snmp.h for TCP extended statistics at /proc/net/netstat and > it does not seem to be defined by any RFC specification. I thought those were part of some MIB somewhere. Doesnt RFC 4898 cover them? In any case, it seems to me to be more accurate to not call them MIB stats if they are not. This doesnt qualify using the macros, utilities etc used for MIBs. > Then I feel it is not so bad to > use _MIB_ for them. Maybe we have another idea to merge them into LINUX_MIB. > > Now we have the following candidates: > > (1) my patch XFRM_MIB_INHDRERROR > (2) some extender XFRM_XXX_INHDRERROR (XXX is requested) > (3) not-mib extender XFRM_NOTMIB_INHDRERROR > (4) no extender XFRM_INHDRERROR > (5) merge linux-mib LINUX_MIB_XFRMINHDRERROR > > Comments? I am very tempted to say #4. And when you push this to be a real MIB stat then > > > 2) Why /proc? Are you going to make these available also via netlink? > > Because /proc is easy to see it without any modified application. > If you want the netlink interface, I can do it as the next step. Do you want > it? Absolutely - it would be much appreciated. And if you dont have time, I will write and test the user space part extension. cheers, jamal - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
