Re: Netlink connector

[Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru>]

On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 04:42:14AM -0400, Harald Welte (laforge@netfilter.org) wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 02:02:10AM -0400, James Morris wrote:
> > On Sun, 24 Jul 2005, David S. Miller wrote:
> > >From: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru>
> > >Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 13:14:55 +0400
> > >>Andrew has no objection against connector and it lives in -mm
> > >A patch sitting in -mm has zero significance.
> > 
> > The significance I think is that Andrew is trying to gently encourage some 
> > further progress in the area.
> 
> Patrick McHardy is currently working on some ideas on how to extend
> netlink.
> 
> The fundamental problem that the connector is trying to solve:
> 
> 1) provide more 'groups' (to transport more different kinds of events)
> 2) provide an abstract API for other kernel code, so it doesn't have to
>    know anything about skb's or networking.
> 
> IMHO issue number '1' should (and can) be adressed within netlink.  Wait
> for Patrick's work on this to show up on netdev.  We can then think
> whether the connctor API (or something similar) can be put on top of it.

Fair enough.
Let's do it this way.

> -- 
> - Harald Welte <laforge@netfilter.org>                 http://netfilter.org/
> ============================================================================
>   "Fragmentation is like classful addressing -- an interesting early
>    architectural error that shows how much experimentation was going
>    on while IP was being designed."                    -- Paul Vixie



-- 
	Evgeniy Polyakov