[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <84f1a89f-20f0-a559-8a1b-da1400794f29@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 14:56:48 -0600
From: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To: Thomas Winter <Thomas.Winter@...iedtelesis.co.nz>,
Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"roopa@...ulusnetworks.com" <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
"nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com" <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>,
"pch@...bogen.com" <pch@...bogen.com>,
"jkbs@...hat.com" <jkbs@...hat.com>,
"yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org" <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
"mlxsw@...lanox.com" <mlxsw@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] ipv6: Calculate hash thresholds for IPv6
nexthops
On 5/2/18 2:48 PM, Thomas Winter wrote:
> Should I look at reworking this? It would be great to have these ECMP routes for other purposes.
Looking at my IPv6 bug list this change is on it -- allowing ECMP routes
to have a device only hop.
Let me take a look at it at the same time as a few other bugs.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists