From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([209.87.249.19]:59964 "EHLO tuna.sandelman.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750999AbbHAH3N (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Aug 2015 03:29:13 -0400 From: Michael Richardson Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 bluetooth-next 1/2] ieee802154: 6lowpan: remove multiple lowpan support In-Reply-To: <1438341102-15878-2-git-send-email-alex.aring@gmail.com> References: <1438341102-15878-1-git-send-email-alex.aring@gmail.com> <1438341102-15878-2-git-send-email-alex.aring@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 20:34:57 -0400 Message-ID: <4122.1438389297@sandelman.ca> Sender: linux-wpan-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Alexander Aring Cc: linux-wpan@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pengutronix.de --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Alexander Aring wrote: > We currently supports multiple lowpan interfaces per wpan interface. I > never saw any use case into such functionality. We drop this feature I was confused at first, because I was sure that you didn't mean that we would not have support for multiple radios. What you are saying is that we won't have multiple lowpan adaption layers per wpan interface? That does not, I think mean that we can't respond to multiple EUI-64 layer-2 addresses, but does it have any affect on ability to respond to multiple 16-bit (short) addresses? --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQEVAwUBVbwULYCLcPvd0N1lAQJKlQgAkqa9nB805xlZ65yKX4yXA8qn9bsdQttq GIQ05yWG1rUHbFO46BNL14RF6KAdyyrkjKIHRx5CDLUUjYDvvZevnBxgU5cU5vm2 CWHzn4luOJnoTdVUMi7pNxDVDRtDOpEc/cQiWG2Efymp1yjG+KL4OMM3Ddp7Do1M 2aCRD+jDYcQwMjz5rdO5vlpAAJG+/c1wHUoIh7v0tEQrLwhNwo1SbfVrQCy9ImuM PGDMkZIA+XHijtiMYtfrB3myWtTfl8kBXtvUxOhQaGzdvJU1myaT2wEetQKuy9ie wtas87pq4GOa8idHGEhPk9dn1XX96Qt3Q7MKDKSKExul4u2pO9/MgQ== =z+Sy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--