From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Varun Chandramohan Subject: Re: [PATCH] Age Entry For IPv4 Route Table Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:51:39 +0530 Message-ID: <467F50E3.2050405@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20070625102838.9d1fee20.varunc@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20070625.141451.21870598.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, sri@us.ibm.com, dlstevens@us.ibm.com, varuncha@in.ibm.com To: =?UTF-8?B?WU9TSElGVUpJIEhpZGVha2kgLyDlkInol6Toi7HmmI4=?= Return-path: Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.152]:47248 "EHLO e34.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750825AbXFYFVv (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jun 2007 01:21:51 -0400 Received: from d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.227]) by e34.co.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5P5Louj029008 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2007 01:21:50 -0400 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (d03av03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.169]) by d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.3) with ESMTP id l5P5LoLC267012 for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2007 23:21:50 -0600 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l5P5LnJX017260 for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2007 23:21:50 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20070625.141451.21870598.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / =E5=90=89=E8=97=A4=E8=8B=B1=E6=98=8E wrote: > In article <20070625102838.9d1fee20.varunc@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (at Mo= n, 25 Jun 2007 10:28:38 +0530), Varun Chandramohan says: > > =20 >> According to the RFC 4292 (IP Forwarding Table MIB) there is a need = for an age entry for all the routes in the routing table. The entry in = the RFC is inetCidrRouteAge and oid is inetCidrRouteAge.1.10. >> Many snmp application require this age entry. So iam adding the age = field in the routing table and providing >> the interface for this value via /proc/net/route. >> =20 > > I'm not in favor of adding new field(s) to /proc/net/route. > > =20 Do you think it will break any user level functionality? I have tested with netstat, route and net-snmp which reads from the same /proc interface. They seem to work fine. > --yoshfuji > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > =20