DragonFly submit List (threaded) for 2008-07
Re: RFC3542 support on DragonFly BSD.
Thanks for comment, :), I have send email too fast just now,
I now get what's you mean and will remove routing header type 0 from
my codes and document, and see RFC5095 for more detail.
Thanks for instruction.
On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 3:24 AM, Hasso Tepper <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Dashu Huang wrote:
>> Hi All:
>> This patch is for the Google summer code project of "RFC3542 support
>> on DragonFlyBSD", for more detail please see the document "The Design
>> and implementation of RFC3542 support on DragonFly BSD.pdf" in
> Good work. I'm sure there are guys making more comments and more detailed
> review, but at first I have to kick myself not catching it earlier in the
> progress - routing header type 0 is really obsolete - see RFC5095 3:
> "IPv6 implementations are no longer required to implement RH0 in any
> way.". Therefore most of code handling RH0 can be just removed. There is
> just no point to preserve the code for compatibility with RFC2292.
> It does not mean that inet6_rth_*() functions could be removed - these
> have to stay as stubs (as they were AFAIK) and wait for code to handle
> type2 headers. You should be also careful not breaking whole world via
> removing members from structures, but the code handling these has to go
> (as most of rthdr.c in the kernel and related code in the ping6 for
> PS. Note that in vacation and not able to participate in discussion much,
> but I hope there are others who have opinion regarding the project :).
> Hasso Tepper