From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute/master 0/3] lost mpls ip tunnel patches Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 10:24:51 -0700 Message-ID: <20170614102451.42b301bd@xeon-e3> References: <1497058292-10099-1-git-send-email-kjlx@templeofstupid.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, simon.horman@netronome.com, dsahern@gmail.com To: Krister Johansen Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f179.google.com ([209.85.192.179]:36793 "EHLO mail-pf0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752271AbdFNRY7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jun 2017 13:24:59 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f179.google.com with SMTP id x63so3395909pff.3 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 10:24:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1497058292-10099-1-git-send-email-kjlx@templeofstupid.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 18:31:29 -0700 Krister Johansen wrote: > Hi Stephen, > I'm a bit unsure of the decorum in this particular situation. Kernel > support for mpls/ip tunnels was integrated back in July of 2016. At the > time, the author of that feature sent out a RFC patch for the iproute > support but never followed up on subsequent code review comments. > > The kernel support got merged, but the iproute support never made it in. > I wanted to run some tests with these features. In the process, I > tracked down the author's original patches, merged them into current > iproute, and attempted to address the comments from code reviewers. > In order to get merged, an RFC message should be followed by a final non RFC version. I think you will find the original's were marked in patchwork as RFC.