netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 13/13] ipv6: route: per route IP tunnel metadata via lightweight tunnel

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20150819123151.3802e8f3@griffin>
Date:	Wed, 19 Aug 2015 12:31:51 +0200
From:	Jiri Benc <jbenc@...hat.com>
To:	YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <hideaki.yoshifuji@...aclelinux.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 13/13] ipv6: route: per route IP tunnel
 metadata via lightweight tunnel

On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 19:27:22 +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
> > You're right generally. But this one should be okay and I did this
> > deliberately: the patch adding LWTUNNEL_ENCAP_ILA was merged two days
> > ago, is in net-next only, is not used by anything in user space yet.
> > And I think it's better to have LWTUNNEL_ENCAP_IP and
> > LWTUNNEL_ENCAP_IP6 without anything in between.
> 
> I do think you should have some descriptions.

Sorry, I meant to put this into the description but forget to add it
after the rebase on top of ILA (as the patchset conflicted with the ILA
work and was developed in parallel).

Are you okay with inserting LWTUNNEL_ENCAP_IP6 before
LWTUNNEL_ENCAP_ILA? If so, I'll resend with the explanation added.

Thanks,

 Jiri

-- 
Jiri Benc
--
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