From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37591) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1acnKN-0007Ho-Td for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 00:03:33 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1acnKK-0004aw-Q5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 00:03:31 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:41696) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1acnKK-0004ah-KV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 00:03:28 -0500 References: <56D94A46.80007@redhat.com> <56D9AEC8.50707@siemens.com> <20160306165954.GJ2710@var.home> From: Jason Wang Message-ID: <56DD0B8F.4040908@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 13:03:11 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160306165954.GJ2710@var.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv9 0/10] slirp: Adding IPv6 support to Qemu -net user mode List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Samuel Thibault , Jan Kiszka Cc: Thomas Huth , zhanghailiang , Li Zhijian , Stefan Hajnoczi , Dave Gilbert , Vasiliy Tolstov , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Gonglei , Huangpeng , Guillaume Subiron On 03/07/2016 12:59 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Hello, > > Jan Kiszka, on Fri 04 Mar 2016 16:50:32 +0100, wrote: >> On 2016-03-04 09:41, Thomas Huth wrote: >>> On 22.02.2016 20:28, Samuel Thibault wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> This is another respin of IPv6 in Qemu -net user mode. >>>> >>>> These patches add ICMPv6, NDP, make UDP and TCP compatible with IPv6, and add >>>> TFTP over IPv6. >>> *ping* >>> >>> Jan, Jason, >>> >>> could you please have a look at this series? Would be cool to include it >>> for 2.6 so that we'd finally have IPv6 support in Slirp, too. >>> As far as I could see, the patches look fine now - there was just one >>> rather cosmetic issue left in patch 9/10, but it should also be ok in >>> the current shape already, I think, so IMHO no need for a respin. >> As indicated before, we need someone else than me to manage the slirp >> system. I'm out of bandwidth for this task, sorry. > Ok, Jason? > > I'm really surprised that a patch that has been reviewed two times (by > me then by Thomas) seems so difficult to get it. I understand that > it's far from trivial, but I have concerns with how qemu can manage > contributions. > > Samuel Sorry. I wasn't aware of needing a new maintainer for slirp before. Will look at this series soon and take slirp until we have a new maintainer. Btw, do you want to be the maintainer of slirp? (Or maybe Tohmas want to do this?) Thanks