From: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
To: jagana@us.ibm.com
Cc: yoshfuji@wide.ad.jp, kkumar@beaverton.ibm.com,
kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, ajtuomin@tml.hut.fi, lpetande@tml.hut.fi,
netdev@oss.sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 02:37:18 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021101.023718.64663422.davem@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OFFA13F15A.27343A7E-ON88256C64.00238392@boulder.ibm.com>
From: "Venkata Jagana" <jagana@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 22:51:13 -0800
I believe even the registration part should belong to kernel and
here are the reasons why.
The Home Agent needs to ...
None of the things you've listed make it desirable to put the home
agent registration into the kernel. All of the operations you
describe could be invoked by the userland home agent daemon using very
minimal glue logic in the kernel (invoked, for example, via netlink
messages).
(Hint: this glue logic could even be useful for other things)
Look, it is bad enough we have to put pfkey2 security database into
the kernel (and that most IKE daemons duplicate the whole database in
the user process as well), so let's not continue with such disasters.
Just like a router changes and monitors routes, a home agent daemon
would change and monitor mipv6 state. So for the same reason we don't
put OSPF routing databases into the kernel, we do not put the home
agent registration into the kernel :-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-11-01 10:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-11-01 6:51 [PATCHSET] Mobile IPv6 for 2.5.45 Venkata Jagana
2002-11-01 10:37 ` David S. Miller [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-11-02 21:13 Krishna Kumar
2002-11-03 2:23 ` Werner Almesberger
2002-11-02 1:15 Krishna Kumar
2002-11-02 3:00 ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
2002-11-02 8:36 ` Pekka Savola
2002-11-02 8:23 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-11-02 0:32 Venkata Jagana
2002-11-01 2:19 Krishna Kumar
2002-11-01 2:17 ` David S. Miller
2002-11-01 2:36 ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20021101.023718.64663422.davem@redhat.com \
--to=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=ajtuomin@tml.hut.fi \
--cc=jagana@us.ibm.com \
--cc=kkumar@beaverton.ibm.com \
--cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lpetande@tml.hut.fi \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=yoshfuji@wide.ad.jp \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).