Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 21 Oct 2002 14:52:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 21 Oct 2002 14:52:23 -0400 Received: from dell-paw-3.cambridge.redhat.com ([195.224.55.237]:19706 "EHLO passion.cambridge.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 21 Oct 2002 14:52:22 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 13/07/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 From: David Woodhouse X-Accept-Language: en_GB In-Reply-To: References: To: jamal Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: rtnetlink interface state monitoring problems. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 19:57:50 +0100 Message-ID: <24818.1035226670@passion.cambridge.redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 997 Lines: 25 hadi@cyberus.ca said: > I cant see anything on netlink and irda; i am also not very familiar > with either IrDA or Bluetooth. Regardless, you dont need to be a net > device to use netlink. IrDA devices are network devices. The core network code sends a RTM_NETLINK message when they go up or down. All is well, and once the permission fix gets into the kernel I'm using, my irda monitor applet no longer needs to poll the state of the interface. But Bluetooth devices are not network devices, it seems. There exists no current mechanism for notifying anyone of state changes. Should we invent a new method of notification using netlink, or should Bluetooth interfaces in fact be normal network devices just like IrDA devices are? -- dwmw2 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/