Re: [PATCH] anycast support for IPv6, updated to 2.5.44

From: David S. Miller (davem@redhat.com)
Date: Wed Mar 19 2003 - 22:47:35 EST


   From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / $B5HF#1QL@(B <yoshfuji@wide.ad.jp>
   Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 12:44:28 +0900 (JST)

   In article <20030319.192331.95884882.davem@redhat.com> (at Wed, 19 Mar 2003 19:23:31 -0800 (PST)), "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> says:
   
> Please propose alternative API, or do you suggest not
> to export this facility to user at all?
   
   I like to assign address like unicast (using ioctl and rtnetlink
   (RTN_ANYCAST)).
   We suggest you not exporting this facilicy until finishing new API
   (And, another API would be standardized;
   This is another reason why I am against exporting that API for now.)

I think anycast addresses are more like multicast than unicast. Do
you agree about this?

But here is what really matters, does the advanced IPV6 socket API
say anything about a user API for anycast?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 23 2003 - 22:00:29 EST