Re: [issue1090] RFC3542 support on DragonFly BSD.

["Dashu Huang" <hds719@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Hasso:
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.
Best wishes!
Huang Dashu

On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 3:27 AM, Hasso Tepper
<bugs@lists.dragonflybsd.org> wrote:
>
> Hasso Tepper <hasso@estpak.ee> added the comment:
>
> 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
> example).
>
> 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 :).
>
> ----------
> status: unread -> chatting
>
> _____________________________________________________
> DragonFly issue tracker <bugs@lists.dragonflybsd.org>
> <https://bugs.dragonflybsd.org/issue1090>
> _____________________________________________________
>