From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stefan Richter Subject: Re: [RFC:] struct net_device_ops: Add function pointer to fill device specific ndisc information Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 09:09:51 +0100 Message-ID: <20130121090951.103c0680@stein> References: <50FC2EE4.3080705@gmail.com> <50FC3BB1.4070005@linux-ipv6.org> <50FC6068.3020302@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki , netdev , linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, David Miller To: stephan.gatzka@gmail.com Return-path: Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8]:48036 "EHLO einhorn.in-berlin.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750803Ab3AUIKJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jan 2013 03:10:09 -0500 In-Reply-To: <50FC6068.3020302@gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Jan 20 Stephan Gatzka wrote: > On 01/20/2013 07:47 PM, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote: > > > My current position is to change "mac address" to > > > > struct fwnet_hwaddr { > > u8 guid[8]; > > u8 max_rec; > > u8 sspd; > > u8 fifo[6]; > > }; > > > > That is something I'm not really convinced of. As Stefan Richter pointed > out clearly, the fifo address might be different between IPv4 and IPv6 > communication. If it is of any help, the initial implementation could assume that IPv4 unicast_FIFO and IPv6 unicast_FIFO are the same. RFC 3146 is silent on this topic (which means it can be one way or the other), but from an implementation point of view, using one FIFO offset for both seems quite natural. Currently the only existing RFC 3146 implementation which is known to us is Mac OS X, and since your tests with OS X 10.6 went well, they obviously use one offset for both protocols. But if we actually put this assumption into the implementation now, we should make sure that we can easily expand the implementation later in the event that a third implementation comes across which uses separate unicast_FIFOs. -- Stefan Richter -=====-===-= ---= =-=-= http://arcgraph.de/sr/