Message-ID: <3FA70015.8080805@ixiacom.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 17:25:41 -0800
From: Dan Kegel <dkegel@ixiacom.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030617
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
CC: fleury@cs.auc.dk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: allocating netlink families?
References: <3FA6F628.70305@ixiacom.com> <20031103170935.5c6688b9.davem@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20031103170935.5c6688b9.davem@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1105
Lines: 31

David S. Miller wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Nov 2003 16:43:20 -0800
> Dan Kegel <dkegel@ixiacom.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Has there been any discussion of how one should pick
>>netlink family numbers for new stuff like netkeeper?
>>Sure, everyone could use NETLINK_USERSOCK, but
>>that means only one new netlink module could be resident at a time...
> 
> 
> When it's determined to be useful and to be added to
> the main kernel sources, we'll allocate a number.
> Before that time, there is no need to allocate.  We'd
> run out quickly if everyone with a funny netlink thing they
> wanted to do asked for a number.

I guess I was really wondering what somebody who wants to
use two netlink things in the same system should do.  Steal
family 31, I suppose.  Ah, well.
I'll just happily use NETLINK_USERSOCK, and won't ask about
clashes until I really run into one.

- Dan


-
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/