netdev - Re: [PATCH] ipv6: sr: update the struct ipv6_sr

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: <20171115124202.bcb98eba1523e6957b34ccaf@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Nov 2017 12:42:02 +0100
From:   Ahmed Abdelsalam <amsalam20@...il.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     ecree@...arflare.com, david.lebrun@...ouvain.be,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv6: sr: update the struct ipv6_sr_hdr

On Wed, 15 Nov 2017 09:55:32 +0900 (KST)
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:

> From: Ahmed Abdelsalam <amsalam20@...il.com>
> Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 15:31:48 +0100
> 
> > Also it will not make sense to have the field name differnent from the draft.
> 
> That is the danger of defining user facing things against a draft which
> is constantly changing.
> 

I totally understand your point of keeping the user API unchanged. 

> Sorry, we are stuck with the current name.

For the time being, Can i submit another patch updating the "reserved" bits to be "tag" and just adding a comment next the "first_segment". 
In the comment we can mention that this represent the "last_entry" field of the Segment Routing Header (SRH).


-- 
Ahmed