From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / =?iso-2022-jp?B?GyRCNUhGIzFRTEAbKEI=?= Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3][XFRM]: Support packet processing error statistics. Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 12:59:25 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <20071024.125925.86627480.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> References: <11930334662094-git-send-email-nakam@linux-ipv6.org> <1193056091.4422.33.camel@localhost> <200710231608.34661.nakam@linux-ipv6.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: hadi@cyberus.ca, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org To: nakam@linux-ipv6.org Return-path: Received: from yue.linux-ipv6.org ([203.178.140.15]:35986 "EHLO yue.st-paulia.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753615AbXJXD7W (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2007 23:59:22 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200710231608.34661.nakam@linux-ipv6.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org In article <200710231608.34661.nakam@linux-ipv6.org> (at Tue, 23 Oct 2007 16:08:34 +0900), Masahide NAKAMURA says: > Monday 22 October 2007 21:28, jamal wrote: > > On Mon, 2007-22-10 at 15:11 +0900, Masahide NAKAMURA wrote: : > This point is one of what I want to hear comment. > My patch uses "XFRM_MIB_XXX" because I found "LINUX_MIB_XXX" definition at > include/linux/snmp.h for TCP extended statistics at /proc/net/netstat and > it does not seem to be defined by any RFC specification. Then I feel it is not so bad to > use _MIB_ for them. Maybe we have another idea to merge them into LINUX_MIB. > > Now we have the following candidates: > > (1) my patch XFRM_MIB_INHDRERROR > (2) some extender XFRM_XXX_INHDRERROR (XXX is requested) > (3) not-mib extender XFRM_NOTMIB_INHDRERROR > (4) no extender XFRM_INHDRERROR > (5) merge linux-mib LINUX_MIB_XFRMINHDRERROR > > Comments? I would support (5) or (1). --yoshfuji