Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 04:12:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 04:12:43 -0400 Received: from e2.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.102]:51445 "EHLO e2.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 04:12:41 -0400 From: "David Stevens" Importance: Normal Sensitivity: Subject: Re: [PATCH] anycast support for IPv6, linux-2.5.31 To: Pekka Savola Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, , X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.4a July 24, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 01:16:39 -0700 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D03NM035/03/M/IBM(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 08/30/2002 02:16:46 AM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1642 Lines: 47 Pekka, You wrote: >Before going too much down this path, I think one should write an Internet >Draft about the proposed API (should be quite short & simple) and see what >kind of response it has in the relevant working groups. I don't disagree with that, for informational purposes, but it doesn't conflict with the RFC's, which of course don't cover API's, and don't specify any interface for anycasting. However, my primary goal is to get anycasting support with an in-kernel interface in 2.5 before the freeze. :-) I used the setsockopt() API for testing, and left it in the patch for others to do the same. Though I think it's the right approach, for the reasons I mentioned, I'd rather see that portion pulled from the patch if it's controversial, than have the in-kernel interface and anycasting proper delayed over that. The one use of anycast I'm aware of right now is for IPv6 mobility, which needs the in-kernel interface. The user-level interface is important for future applications, and a reference-counted setsockopt() interface doesn't mean we can't also have an ip/ifconfig interface for permanent anycast addresses, too (the required anycast addresses in this patch are permanent, for example). So I don't see it as committing to one choice, but having in-kernel anycast support (soon) I think is the more important first step. +-DLS - 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/