Re: [PATCH] anycast support for IPv6, updated to 2.5.44

David S. Miller (davem@redhat.com)
Wed, 19 Mar 2003 19:47:35 -0800 (PST)


From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@wide.ad.jp>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 12:44:28 +0900 (JST)

In article <20030319.192331.95884882.davem@redhat.com> (at Wed, 19 Mar 2003 19:23:31 -0800 (PST)), "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> says:

> Please propose alternative API, or do you suggest not
> to export this facility to user at all?

I like to assign address like unicast (using ioctl and rtnetlink
(RTN_ANYCAST)).
We suggest you not exporting this facilicy until finishing new API
(And, another API would be standardized;
This is another reason why I am against exporting that API for now.)

I think anycast addresses are more like multicast than unicast. Do
you agree about this?

But here is what really matters, does the advanced IPV6 socket API
say anything about a user API for anycast?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/