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: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 17:14:53 +0200
Julius Volz wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 8:26 AM, Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I don't really have any concrete ideas about what a better
interface would look like. But I am more than happy to hash our ideas.

Good! At the moment I'm looking at various netlink docs and figuring
out how things generally work. I think netlink probably adds a lot of
complexity over the previous sockopt interface, but I hope it's worth

As for compatibility and extensibility, how is that best achieved with
netlink? I've seen some examples copy whole C structs into netlink
datagrams, but that is obviously what we don't want anymore. So the
way to go seems to be to transfer each struct field as a separate
netlink attribute, right?

Yes. You can also group those which belong together logically
in nested attributes.
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>