[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130322142735.GA11368@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:27:35 +0000
From: Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
To: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-decnet-user@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] decnet: Parse netlink attributes on our own
On 03/21/13 at 06:04pm, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> You shouldn't need any special hardware to test this. A copy of iproute2
> should be enough as you should be able to use that to create an
> interface or two and a route between them, etc. Although DECnet routing
> works in a different way to ip routing, the Linux implementation tries
> to stick fairly closely to the ip way of doing things whenever it can in
> order to share infrastructure. Now that ip has diverged a fair bit over
> time that isn't quite as true as it was, but there shouldn't be anything
> too surprising in there.
Alright, I did some basic testing with iproute2. I do not claim
to understand what I did but I ran the following:
$ ip -f dnet route add 1.661 dev em1
$ ip -f dnet route list
1.661 dev em1 scope link
$ ip -f dnet neigh add 6.662 dev em1
$ ip -f dnet neigh list
6.662 dev em1 lladdr aa:00:04:00:96:1a PERMANENT
$ ip -f dnet addr add 1.111 dev em1
$ ip -f dnet addr list
2: em1: <NO-CARRIER,BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state DOWN qlen 1000
dnet 1.111/16 scope global em1
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists