netdev - Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 0/5] seg6: Segment routing fixes

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <37b3454d-50cc-b436-c0ca-de92adc78f5d@solarflare.com>
Date:   Mon, 10 Jun 2019 15:07:13 +0100
From:   Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
To:     Tom Herbert <tom@...ntonium.net>
CC:     Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <dlebrun@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 0/5] seg6: Segment routing fixes

On 10/06/2019 15:03, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 5:54 AM Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com <mailto:ecree@...arflare.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 07/06/2019 19:55, Tom Herbert wrote:
>     > This patch set includes fixes to bring the segment routing
>     > implementation into conformance with the latest version of the
>     > draft (draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-19).
>     AIUI the concept of "conformance" doesn't really belong in the context
>
>
> They can't be referred to as standards, but if conform is too strong a term, maybe we can say implements draft xyz.
That seems reasonable, yes.