From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/6] net: Generalize udp based tunnel offload Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2015 13:03:13 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20151205.130313.1952213347830357234.davem@davemloft.net> References: <566279E5.9070500@gmail.com> <20151205.014909.1572453190886968569.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tom@herbertland.com, hannes@stressinduktion.org, linville@tuxdriver.com, jesse@kernel.org, anjali.singhai@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, kiran.patil@intel.com To: alexander.duyck@gmail.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:36296 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751228AbbLESDR (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Dec 2015 13:03:17 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Alexander Duyck Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 00:24:55 -0800 > Still, hard blocking this isn't necessarily going to push the > vendors to change their ways. Pushing back is different from blocking entirely. That means I'm going to be very difficult and make a lot of noise until I see the message has seeped in. It doesn't mean that I won't allow a means to use existing hardware offloads. You'll just have to bear with me, be patient, and survive my tantrum on this matter.