From: Brian Haley <brian.haley@hp.com>
To: Joerg Roedel <joro-lkml@zlug.org>
Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, jamal <hadi@cyberus.ca>,
Jan-Benedict Glaw <jbglaw@lug-owl.de>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>,
davem@davemloft.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/03][RESUBMIT] net: EtherIP tunnel driver
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:49:14 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <451840CA.5060901@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060925083249.GC23028@zlug.org>
Joerg Roedel wrote:
>> Is there something in the RFC that suggests that a byte order other than
>> 'network order' is possible/acceptable there?
>
> No. The RFC states nothing at all about byte- or bitorder. That is why
> the RFC is ambigious at this point.
RFC 791 (IPv4) Appendix B does give instructions on byte ordering for
all IPv4 headers and data, and RFC 791 is listed in the References for
RFC 3378. I noticed this is only Informational, not a Standards track
document, so I guess the non-interoperable implementations kind of go
with the territory.
-Brian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-09-25 20:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-23 12:07 [PATCH 00/03][RESUBMIT] net: EtherIP tunnel driver Joerg Roedel
2006-09-23 12:13 ` Jan-Benedict Glaw
2006-09-23 12:27 ` Joerg Roedel
2006-09-23 12:38 ` jamal
2006-09-23 13:27 ` Joerg Roedel
2006-09-25 1:07 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2006-09-25 8:32 ` Joerg Roedel
2006-09-25 20:49 ` Brian Haley [this message]
2006-09-23 23:35 ` David Miller
2006-09-25 8:18 ` Joerg Roedel
2006-09-25 10:22 ` Andi Kleen
2006-09-25 11:57 ` Joerg Roedel
2006-09-25 12:16 ` Andi Kleen
2006-09-25 12:35 ` Joerg Roedel
2006-09-23 12:13 ` [PATCH 01/03] net: EtherIP driver, header and MAINTAINERS changes Joerg Roedel
2006-09-23 12:16 ` [PATCH 02/03] net/bridge: add support for EtherIP devices Joerg Roedel
2006-09-24 4:01 ` Stephen Hemminger
2006-09-25 8:24 ` Joerg Roedel
2006-09-25 14:40 ` Stephen Hemminger
2006-09-25 14:54 ` Joerg Roedel
2006-09-23 12:20 ` [PATCH 03/03][IPROUTE2] EtherIP tunnel and device support for iproute2 Joerg Roedel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=451840CA.5060901@hp.com \
--to=brian.haley@hp.com \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hadi@cyberus.ca \
--cc=jbglaw@lug-owl.de \
--cc=joro-lkml@zlug.org \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).