From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Friesen Subject: Re: IPv6 destination cache in Linux kernel Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 13:58:58 -0600 Message-ID: <4E136D02.3060302@genband.com> References: <20110704.174619.1196575558517508080.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mparemm@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from exprod7og103.obsmtp.com ([64.18.2.159]:55132 "EHLO exprod7og103.obsmtp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752487Ab1GET7D (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jul 2011 15:59:03 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20110704.174619.1196575558517508080.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/04/2011 06:46 PM, David Miller wrote: > From: Mikhail Paremski > Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2011 17:35:04 -0700 > >> 1. What are the reasons to rout datagrams differently fromIPv4? > > It was just a design decision made when the ipv6 routing code > was implemented. Presumably there was some rationale for doing it differently than the existing IPv4 code. Or was it just for fun? >> 2. Where I could get details how IPv6 stack routes datagrams? > > By reading the source code. While the source code has the final say, for someone new to a given part of the kernel it is helpful to have a high-level view of the overall flow. It's a lot easier to understand something if you can place it in the overall scheme of of things. Chris -- Chris Friesen Software Developer GENBAND chris.friesen@genband.com www.genband.com