Re: [PATCH 00/26] IPVS: Add first IPv6 support to IPVS.

To: Julius Volz <juliusv@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/26] IPVS: Add first IPv6 support to IPVS.
Cc: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Vince Busam <vbusam@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, lvs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 17:46:39 +0200
Julius Volz wrote:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 3:38 PM, Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Julius Volz wrote:
I wonder if now would be a good time to bite the bullet and design
a new interface that is extendable.
If we really have to break it once for IPv6 anyways, it seems like a
good opportunity. Depends on how invasive the changes would need to
be, of course...
You don't need to break the old interface, just add an additional

Ok, then we will just keep the old one in parallel for some time.

You probably already have some ideas on what a better interface would
look like? Especially, how to design it for future backwards
compatibility? And would it still use sockopts or rather one of the
other communication mechanisms?
I'd suggest genetlink or nfnetlink.

Ah, that's what I thought... Are there any simple kernel examples with
userspace counterparts to look at? I know iproute2 uses netlink, but
it seems like a rather complicated example.

For nfnetlink: net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_netlink.c and
libnfnetlink_conntrack from

Genetlink seems especially nice, although I couldn't find a general
explanation of it other than in git history.

I don't have an example for genetlink, but I guess you should
find some in libnl. In this case I guess both would be fine
since ipvs is only loosely tied to the rest of netfilter.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>