From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Venkata Jagana Subject: Re: [patch]: CONFIG_IPV6_SUBTREES fix for MIPv6 Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 13:38:01 -0700 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <3ED7C129.2000800@us.ibm.com> References: <20030424132559.GA15894@morphine.tml.hut.fi> <20030531.000319.114704530.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: vnuorval@tcs.hut.fi, davem@redhat.com, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, netdev@oss.sgi.com, ajtuomin@morphine.tml.hut.fi, lpetande@morphine.tml.hut.fi, jagana@us.ibm.com, kumarkr@us.ibm.com Return-path: To: yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org In-Reply-To: <20030531.000319.114704530.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org When we have tested this recently (just two months ago), we found only two bugs but MIPL has already fixed those in their development version. How long before have you tested this and what problems have you encountered in your test? Thanks, Venkat YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / wrote: >In article (at Fri, 30 May 2003 17:34:40 +0300 (EEST)), Ville Nuorvala says: > > > >>here is a patch that fixes CONFIG_IPV6_SUBTREES and allows overriding >>normal routes with source address specific ones. This is for example >>needed in MIPv6 for handling the traffic to and from a mobile node's home >>address correctly. >> >> > >Let us test the patch. It seemed buggy when USAGI tested before. > > >