From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mail.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.172]:46155 "EHLO ns3.lanforge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755260Ab3AXSpo (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2013 13:45:44 -0500 Received: from [192.168.100.226] (firewall.candelatech.com [70.89.124.249]) (authenticated bits=0) by ns3.lanforge.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id r0OIjhTC014517 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:45:44 -0800 Message-ID: <51018157.9060000@candelatech.com> Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:45:43 -0800 From: Ben Greear MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Comments on the bind-to-local IP patch series I posted? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: I'd really like to get some feedback on whether the patches I posted have a chance at upstream inclusion. If the whole idea is DOA, then just let me know and I promise not to ask again for a few years :) Otherwise, if any improvements are needed, I'll be happy to work on them. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com