Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
>
> >Please note that the ip6protosw is ALSO very broken
>
> unfortunately, you are wrong. yes, protosw is supposed to be
> protocol-independent. however, due to the nature of IPv6 extension
> headers (you can have infinite number of them
Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
>
> >Well what is there now is plainly unacceptable
> >I think that it was asked for as a VERY SHORT TERM hack.
> >But it has been there a long time...
> >I see no reasons so far to not make most of these changes..
>
> well, you are ignoging our design dec
It strikes me that, although some code cleanup may be called for, a week
is too agressive a deadline for many of them to be pushed through,
especially in light of the code maintenance issue on the KAME side. I
suggest that we look at a more gradual approach, as there's no rush right
now for 5.0-
>> >1/ removal of "control" argument from rip6_input and prepend control mbuf
>> >to chain AS IT WAS DESIGNED FOR. This makes rip6_input conform to the proto
>> >type for input. (I have not confirmed that the information in control
>> >is a valid mbuf but it is an mbuf pointer).
>> i don't see
> On Thu, 09 Aug 2001 01:04:54 -0400,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Assume that two prefix are advertised by router to hosts in the network. After some
>time the administrator deletes one of the prefixes and the future router
>advertisement will carry only one prefix.
> What will hosts
> On Sat, 11 Aug 2001 01:32:42 +0900 (JST),
> Hajimu UMEMOTO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
roam> Is there a configuration file or environment variable or some other
roam> way to make getaddrinfo(3) not return AF_INET6 addresses even if
roam> those are available? I know that most utilities t
> On Sun, 12 Aug 2001 18:40:02 +0900,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>> When KAME was added the mesh was less that perfect but there was so much to
>> be done that some shortcuts needed to be taken.
>>
>> now that time has passed some of these can be cleaned up.
>>
>> 1/ Merging ipprotosw.
Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
>
> >> >1/ removal of "control" argument from rip6_input and prepend control mbuf
> >> >to chain AS IT WAS DESIGNED FOR. This makes rip6_input conform to the proto
> >> >type for input. (I have not confirmed that the information in control
> >> >is a valid mbuf but
note: I cannot respond to this address directly.
JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 12 Aug 2001 18:40:02 +0900,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>
> >> When KAME was added the mesh was less that perfect but there was so much to
> >> be done that some shortcuts needed to be
Robert Watson wrote:
>
> It strikes me that, although some code cleanup may be called for, a week
> is too agressive a deadline for many of them to be pushed through,
> especially in light of the code maintenance issue on the KAME side.
I sugggest no changes in 4.x
They have had over a year for
10 matches
Mail list logo
