[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.64.0805071247120.17745@kekkonen.cs.hut.fi>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 12:51:15 +0300 (EEST)
From: Miika Komu <miika@....fi>
To: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
<yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [NET] Exporting of some IPv6 symbols for HIP and SHIM6
experimentation
On Tue, 6 May 2008, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / µÈÆ£±ÑÌÀ wrote:
Hi,
> In article <Pine.SOL.4.64.0805061052470.28110@...konen.cs.hut.fi> (at Tue, 6 May 2008 11:07:49 +0300 (EEST)), Miika Komu <miika@....fi> says:
>
>>> Miika, where are your other patches on top of this?
>>> This kind of change might be okay, but it must be along with
>>> its users, at least.
>>
>> we are maintaining a separate kernel module (GPLv2) for the HIP socket
>> handler for experimentation purposes. If you want to have a look it, you
>> can e.g. download the nightly tarball and have a look at the hipsock
>> directory:
>>
>> http://infrahip.hiit.fi/hipl/hipl.tar.gz
>
> Even though, we basically do not accept patches without in-kernel users.
>
> Anyway, I've quickly looked into the code, and IMHO
> it is better to avoid using hip_select_socket_handler() and
> to introduce new hip_ops (or something) in sock{}.
Ok.
> And, are you working on IPv4 transport?
The IPv6 socket interface is more useful for HIP-aware applications. We
are implementing LSI support for non-hip-aware applications. The other HIP
implementations (BSD HIP and Boeing) support already LSIs for
non-hip-aware applications.
--
Miika Komu http://www.iki.fi/miika/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists