Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752934AbaBYCCW (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Feb 2014 21:02:22 -0500 Received: from shadbolt.e.decadent.org.uk ([88.96.1.126]:36731 "EHLO shadbolt.e.decadent.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752000AbaBYCCU (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Feb 2014 21:02:20 -0500 Message-ID: <1393293719.6823.148.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk> Subject: Re: [RFC v2 2/4] net: enables interface option to skip IP From: Ben Hutchings To: David Miller Cc: dcbw@redhat.com, mcgrof@do-not-panic.com, zoltan.kiss@citrix.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, jmorris@namei.org, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, kaber@trash.net Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 02:01:59 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20140224.191238.921310808350170272.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1393266120.8041.19.camel@dcbw.local> <20140224.180426.411052665068255886.davem@davemloft.net> <1393286520.6823.123.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk> <20140224.191238.921310808350170272.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-YYrQ2oDAg0I7CCTJmDT8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.5-2+b2 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 192.168.4.242 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ben@decadent.org.uk X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shadbolt.decadent.org.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --=-YYrQ2oDAg0I7CCTJmDT8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 19:12 -0500, David Miller wrote: > From: Ben Hutchings > Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 00:02:00 +0000 >=20 > > You can run an internal network, or access network, as v6-only with > > NAT64 and DNS64 at the border. I believe some mobile networks are doin= g > > this; it was also done on the main FOSDEM wireless network this year. >=20 > This seems to be bloating up the networking headers of the internal > network, for what purpose? >=20 > For mobile that's doubly inadvisable. I don't know what the reasoning is for the mobile network operators. They're forced to do NAT for v4 somewhere, and maybe v6-only makes the access network easier to manage. I doubt the extra header length hurts that much on a 3G or 4G network. Ben. --=20 Ben Hutchings Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. - Albert Einstei= n --=-YYrQ2oDAg0I7CCTJmDT8 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIVAwUAUwv5l+e/yOyVhhEJAQpXUA/9HUG2G2LIDPmo09FoOGCUKQ3ak6vf9ZgB WCkn4sqbfANNxloU8AZT/rnWzcaU5GwlTm4b3XCEmiU9pDCOfZDDa81a2j20MnqI MHY61c19Vg7SIeQ46TbVGlUOvn13XkHeqYulQIfgW6EvUnVugVog1/MHdagsTpjM wJSHN1y8NegK07aO9KkEMM16APT6nE1bZ8tVTB5iwaX3b23ZBY/Z5P7Zk70gcbLt 4VoaNmzv76O5SQJ82KQjbpuI+ZNYYXstG6ZIfRUEcFbBEZc0+6LQoEkEK9LOJcSk 4khGycBNemZlQleyhs35WdYde9ZCHkOhHOBzYmmBiuVdy8wwm+rYSEr0RNpBnMji 6cltOYeIX0pXC0FVf7ooeQLrZhYhEmo2AM0qCOqsOt6waTQ54zBmb/PNK2aJUKhJ Gvkb/5aNQrAiOV5XWkrzT+jXRAVd8JYHQYE/nSBHwtdk+mdukXLdlBz4FaB8o5I/ peG/3Xvo+J74WEHLOGJhvKRgS6N6WZ7rurLUX4O4EiSZD90HoSdQBp7yhaasjfEw 65x2pf+ZM99XwS+41dVj9TCc14KjRdbt13FeJaSbz2GD+WpcOIRRdR2/0LL7/Swl lYpVB21XTFhrERBL9qRt1X43sHnqCHgDL1+UfJLmCZ9JXHaQ1vqdkTv9BTTgkeee zdXHXl0KAsg= =rbWU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-YYrQ2oDAg0I7CCTJmDT8-- -- 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/