net-2.6.25-netns branch on git.openvz.org
Hi, All!
I have ported what is ready to send to netdev to 2.6.25 and created appropriate branches on git.openvz.org, namely
- net-2.6.25 aka Miller's 2.6.25 tree
- net-2.6.25-netns with ready patches
Enjoy.
Regars,
Den
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
Quoted 6 lines · Denis V. Lunev
Hi, All!
I have ported what is ready to send to netdev to 2.6.25 and created appropriate branches on git.openvz.org, namely
- net-2.6.25 aka Miller's 2.6.25 tree
- net-2.6.25-netns with ready patches
resyncing ... thanks :)
I will send in a few moments a first round for ipv6 taking into account ip6_fib.
There some other pending patches I will send, I hope before the end of the week.
I am a little lost with what we want to send for net-2.6.25. I mean we planned to send af_unix, af_packet, af_netlink, af_inet and af_inet6.
What is the level of functionnality we want to provide with ipv4 and ipv6. For example we have addresss autoconfiguration for ipv6, shall we send it ?
What about the todo list Pavel planned to do ?
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): 473C4301.6060507-NmTC/[email protected]
Quoted 10 lines · Daniel Lezcano
Quoted 6 lines · Denis V. Lunev
Hi, All!
I have ported what is ready to send to netdev to 2.6.25 and created appropriate branches on git.openvz.org, namely
- net-2.6.25 aka Miller's 2.6.25 tree
- net-2.6.25-netns with ready patchesresyncing ... thanks :)
Quoted 8 lines
I will send in a few moments a first round for ipv6 taking into account
ip6_fib.There some other pending patches I will send, I hope before the end of the week.
I am a little lost with what we want to send for net-2.6.25. I mean we planned to send
af_unix,af_packet,af_netlink,af_inetandaf_inet6.
Theoretically we'd like all of this :) Actually now we're ready to send the first 3 only.
Quoted 5 lines
What is the level of functionnality we want to provide with ipv4 and ipv6. For example we have addresss autoconfiguration for ipv6, shall we send it ?
What about the todo list Pavel planned to do ?
If you mean the patches I wanted to send to Andrew - I've sent 6 of them :) Do you have any plans for my schedule ;) ?
Thanks,
Pavel
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
Quoted 16 lines · Pavel Emelyanov
Quoted 7 lines · Daniel Lezcano
Quoted 6 lines · Denis V. Lunev
Hi, All!
I have ported what is ready to send to netdev to 2.6.25 and created appropriate branches on git.openvz.org, namely
- net-2.6.25 aka Miller's 2.6.25 tree
- net-2.6.25-netns with ready patchesQuoted 7 lines
resyncing ... thanks :)
I will send in a few moments a first round for ipv6 taking into account
ip6_fib.There some other pending patches I will send, I hope before the end of the week.
I am a little lost with what we want to send for net-2.6.25. I mean we planned to send
af_unix,af_packet,af_netlink,af_inetandaf_inet6.
Quoted 8 lines
Theoretically we'd like all of this :) Actually now we're ready to send the first 3 only.
Quoted 3 lines
What is the level of functionnality we want to provide with ipv4 and ipv6. For example we have addresss autoconfiguration for ipv6, shall we send it ?
What about the todo list Pavel planned to do ?
If you mean the patches I wanted to send to Andrew - I've sent 6 of them :) Do you have any plans for my schedule ;) ?
You mentioned in an email to have a git repository at openvz and to make a todo list with the items for the network namespace.
Ah, got the email with the sentence ;)
"Yes, of course. When we publish the git repo we'll try to provide a TODO list so that everyone can participate."
I can send a first draft if you want.
Quoted 10 lines · Daniel Lezcano
Quoted 6 lines · Denis V. Lunev
Hi, All!
I have ported what is ready to send to netdev to 2.6.25 and created appropriate branches on git.openvz.org, namely
- net-2.6.25 aka Miller's 2.6.25 tree
- net-2.6.25-netns with ready patchesresyncing ... thanks :)
Quoted 8 lines
I will send in a few moments a first round for ipv6 taking into account
ip6_fib.There some other pending patches I will send, I hope before the end of the week.
I am a little lost with what we want to send for net-2.6.25. I mean we planned to send
af_unix,af_packet,af_netlink,af_inetandaf_inet6.
I think that should behave like a small squaw eating the bear. Right now we _can_ send netlink preparatory work + PF_UNIX + PF_PACKET. This code is ready, functional and complete. Let's send it now to reduce amount of work for maintaining.
Quoted 3 lines
What is the level of functionnality we want to provide with ipv4 and ipv6. For example we have addresss autoconfiguration for ipv6, shall we send it ?
after that, we can continue the work. I think that we can send all remaining IPv4 code after while in this cycle. The code has been significantly changed and porting/splitting/re-splitting takes longer than I have expected. All sysctl/sysfs handling is out of scope for me now and, I think, Dave is not a right person to accept this code.
It will be very good if we'll have functional IPv4 in this kernel. All other staff looks like a pure bonus. At least we should test and stabilize it.
Quoted 1 line
What about the todo list Pavel planned to do ?
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
Quoted 16 lines · Denis V. Lunev
Quoted 15 lines · Daniel Lezcano
Quoted 6 lines · Denis V. Lunev
Hi, All!
I have ported what is ready to send to netdev to 2.6.25 and created appropriate branches on git.openvz.org, namely
- net-2.6.25 aka Miller's 2.6.25 tree
- net-2.6.25-netns with ready patchesresyncing ... thanks :)
I will send in a few moments a first round for ipv6 taking into account
ip6_fib.There some other pending patches I will send, I hope before the end of the week.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
I am a little lost with what we want to send for net-2.6.25. I mean we planned to send
af_unix,af_packet,af_netlink,af_inetandaf_inet6.I think that should behave like a small squaw eating the bear. Right now we _can_ send netlink preparatory work +
PF_UNIX+PF_PACKET. This code is ready, functional and complete. Let's send it now to reduce amount of work for maintaining.
Agree.
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 3 lines
What is the level of functionnality we want to provide with ipv4 and ipv6. For example we have addresss autoconfiguration for ipv6, shall we send it ?
after that, we can continue the work. I think that we can send all remaining IPv4 code after while in this cycle. The code has been significantly changed and porting/splitting/re-splitting takes longer than I have expected. All sysctl/sysfs handling is out of scope for me now and, I think, Dave is not a right person to accept this code.
Quoted 3 lines
It will be very good if we'll have functional IPv4 in this kernel. All other staff looks like a pure bonus. At least we should test and stabilize it.
The problem I have with ipv6 is that is sharing code with ipv4 namespace like net/core/neigh.c. So it is difficult to test ipv6 namespace without that.
Can I help with ipv4 ?