From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH RESUBMIT2 net-next 1/2] IPv6 routing, NLM_F_* flag support: warn if NEWROUTE lacks of both CREATE and REPLACE flags Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 03:36:08 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20111114.033608.2000639077648429389.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1321254611.23935.15.camel@hakki> <20111114.020617.136865443034405914.davem@davemloft.net> <1321259480.23935.75.camel@hakki> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: matti.vaittinen@nsn.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([198.137.202.13]:40210 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752447Ab1KNIgR (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Nov 2011 03:36:17 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1321259480.23935.75.camel@hakki> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Matti Vaittinen Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:31:20 +0200 > Messages can be changed, that's no problem. I would like to hear suggestions > because I personally see not much problems in current messages. You don't even say that the route request is for an ipv6 route. How in the world can we track down the application if you don't even say what protocol the route request is for?